One New York Democrat proclaims that he proudly opposed the federal
government’s health care overhaul plan. Another one pledges, in the finest Tea
Party spirit, to oppose any future financial bailouts. Still another has rolled
out three Republicans in three separate commercials, all vouching for his credentials.
But there is one word you will not hear mentioned in any of
these campaign advertisements: Democrat
I thought the picture at the above up the Democrat strategy. Try to distance yourself from not only Obama, but the Democrat party as well.
You know you are in trouble when:
A bearded Marxist who likes to spend the public’s money, tries to distance himself from you.
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Chris Coons outlined his disagreements.
with the Obama administration's handling of the bank bailout and support for
offshore oil exploration in an online chat Monday on The News Journal's website.
At times during the campaign, Coons has sought to distance himself
from Washington Democrats and President Barack Obama
The problem in this economy is not a taxing problem, it is a spending problem. It appears the Democrats and Obama don’t understand that.
Since World War II, federal spending has remained roughly between 18
and 22 percent of gross domestic product. Under President George W. Bush,
spending increased from 18.4 to 20.9 percent of GDP. Since President Barack
Obama took office, revenues have fallen by $381 billion and spending has
increased by $508 billion, increasing the deficit from $459 billion to $1.35
trillion. Non-defense discretionary spending alone has jumped 28 percent.
According to the Congressional Budget Office analysis released
Sept. 7, by the end of fiscal year 2010 (Sept. 30), there was another deficit of
at least $1.3 trillion -- what the CBO labeled "the second-largest shortfall in
the past 65 years," second to last year's deficit of 9.9 percent of GDP. Even if
all the Bush tax cuts were repealed, the CBO concludes that the deficit still would be nearly $1.1 trillion in 2011.
It is difficult to understand how a political movement in this country (progressivism) can be so ignorant of American and even world history. Obama demonstrates how far they are from understanding the basics.
In April 2009, President Barack Obama said, "I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."
This reflects a basic misunderstanding of what American exceptionalism means. It doesn’t mean that Americans are exceptional people (although in many respects we are). It means that the values our Founding Fathers expressed in our founding documents are exceptional!
Shultz to Obama: 'You're out of your mind'
Former secretary of state blasts Afghan withdrawal date
Reagan-era Secretary of State George Shultz blasted President Obama
Monday night for his scheduled July 2011 date to begin withdrawing U.S. forces
Mr. Shultz, 89, made the unusually blunt remarks at a packed dinner
for the International Republican Institute -- the GOP-aligned counterpart to the
National Democratic Institute -- where he was receiving the organization's 2010
Why the Left Needs Its Own Tea Party
Glenn Reynolds doesn’t come out and say it, but in his “The Tea Party
Dominance Was Inevitable” editorial he skirts the idea, so I will just say it:
The American left needs its own Tea Party movement. Ordinary Americans with leftist values need to launch an insurgency against the Democratic establishment just as the Tea Party has launched one against the Republican establishment.
The Founders well knew that the primary political dynamic in any
free society was never faction against faction but the people versus the state.
We have forgotten this essential insight at the heart of American governance.
Distracted by the struggle of left versus right, we have let a political class
form that serves no faction but itself. It is The Combine.
This begs the question. If the left did start its own TEA Party (perhaps a TAS Party—Tax and Spend) what pejorative would the press use to define it? Radical? Bigoted? Foolhardy? Probably not.
Gratitude “Chicago” style
Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao apparently bought into all that nonsense. Having defeated Democratic Rep. William Jefferson for Louisiana's 2nd Congressional District, the first Vietnamese American ever elected to Congress went off to Washington in January of 2008 along with the new president.
The New Orleans lawyer said he wanted to work for the benefit of his constituents, whatever that took. So when it came time earlier this year to vote on the House floor on President Obama's massive healthcare bill, the first Republican to hold that district since 1891 became the only Republican in the entire House to vote in favor of the Democratic president's bill.
His wasn't the deciding vote. But, yes, that bipartisan decision caused him some grief among GOP colleagues.
Cao hoped the president might reward that bipartisanship by endorsing him in the Nov. 2 midterm election against a Democratic state legislator named Cedric Richmond. Or at least by staying out of the race, one of 435 across the country.
Now, thanks to the indispensable daily Playbook of Politico’s Mike Allen, the world knows that the very first campaign ad that Obama taped for this fall election cycle was to benefit Democrat Richmond against the Republican who enabled the White House to call healthcare passage bipartisanship.
This reminds me of Bush 41. He compromised with the Democrats and supported tax increases only to have the Democrats attack him for breaking his pledge (Read my lips, no new taxes). There is an old saying, “You play ball with us, and we’ll shove the bat up your (well you can figure out where).”
Nancy Pelosi: GOP attacks are a 'compliment'
Nancy Pelosi: GOP attacks are a 'compliment'
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday evening that she considers
Republican attacks on her a “compliment” — evidence that she’s done her job
Pelosi (D-Calif.) told a friendly audience at a banquet at Fortune
magazine’s “Most Powerful Women Summit” that special interest groups who stand to lose from measures like health care reform, Wall Street reform and college loan legislation want to get rid of those laws.
“No one’s talking about you, you have to wonder what you were
doing,” she said. “I view that as a highest compliment, that they want to take us down,” she said at the event at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington.
Using Pelosi’s logic, the Democrats were complimenting Bush and the Republican Congress as they continually attacked it and tried to take them down. This rationalization is pathetic.
The Tea Party And The Return of Media Bias
Here’s an interesting look at the press and political movements. The gist of the article is that when the left was unhappy and using the internet it was good for democracy. When the right (TEA Party) does it, it’s illegitimate.
Swinging left, there has been a rhetorical flight of several journo
intellectuals into conspiracy, with Jane Mayer in the New Yorker ascribing the
Tea Party movement’s motives and machinations to the moneyed interests of the
Koch brothers, while Matt Taibbi goes even further in the October 15 issue of
Rolling Stone, and claims that the Tea Party movement is being stoked by Goldman Sachs, BP, and an “assortment of nativist freaks, village idiots and Internet Hitlers,” who are all infected by the GOP with “incoherent resentment.”
On these accounts, Tea Partyism is, at best, an expression of bad faith
in genuine democracy; it cannot be honestly held because it is either bought or
the product of dementia.
But why is one kind of political engagement – people acting on what
they read, whether in print or online – authentic and to be celebrated, and the
other kind something that’s negative and to be feared – a string of spat-out
guttural sounds culminating in a furious stab at a chad? If journalists follow a
journalistic theory of democracy, shouldn’t they be at least mildly jazzed by
the Tea Party as political engagement and civic vitality of the Town Hall
interrogations of politicians over health care reform?
Obamacare Failing: High Costs, Red Tape Discourage Enrollment
WASHINGTON – It's a centerpiece of President Barack Obama's health care remake, a lifeline available right now to vulnerable people whose medical problems have made them uninsurable.
But the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan started this summer isn't living up to expectations. Enrollment lags in many parts of the country. People who could benefit may not be able to afford the premiums. Some state officials who run their own "high-risk pools" have pointed out potential problems.
"The federal risk pool has definitely provided critical access, in some cases lifesaving access, to health insurance," said Amie Goldman, chair of a national association of state high-risk insurance pools. "That said, enrollment so far is lower than we would have expected." Goldman runs the Wisconsin state pool, as well as the federal plan in her state.
California, which has money for about 20,000 people, has received fewer than 450 applications, according to a state official. The program in Texas had enrolled about 200 by early September, an official in that state said. In Wisconsin, Goldman said they've received fewer than 300 applications so far, with room for about 8,000 people in the program.