Ben Nelson Should Have Waited
Jan 7, 2010 Political
Ben Nelson sold his political career in the US Senate for Obamacare. Nelson was opposed to provisions of the plan and eventually took a payoff to give his vote even though the payoff did not correct that to which he was opposed. It did, however, give him a provision that requires the rest of the country to pay the tab for Nebraska’s Medicare.
Ever since Nelson sold is soul for party politics his constituents have been letting him have an earful and he has been running around trying to explain why he sold out. Nelson is now saying that Democrats should have waited on health care and focused on the economy.
Mr. Nelson, YOU could have forced them to wait. You claim that Democrats should have waited but you had the power to slow down the process and allow the debate (such that it was with Republicans blocked out) to continue. You sold your vote and now you are trying to blame your party.
You are really a pathetic little man. You voted for the bill and regardless of the reason you should have the testicular fortitude to stand up and take responsibility for YOUR vote. The voters know why you did it so all the rationalizing in the world is not going to save you on this issue. Be a man and accept the responsibility for your actions. The only thing you have going for you is that you are not up for reelection until 2012 but I believe that will be the end of your time in the Senate. Nebraskans will not forget how you betrayed them and how you sold your vote in favor of party politics.
You folks in the great state of Nebraska need to keep pressure on this little man and hold him accountable. It did not take C-SPAN for Americans to see how Nelson betrayed is constituents.
Speaking of C-SPAN, CBS is now on the Obama is not transparent bandwagon. In a piece entitled, Obama Reneges on Health Care Transparency, CBS reports:
During the campaign, though, candidate Obama regularly promised something different – to broadcast all such negotiations on C-SPAN, putting the entire process of pounding out health care reform out in the open. (That promise applied to the now-completed processing of forging House and Senate bills, too.)
Back when Republicans controlled Congress and George W. Bush was in the White House, it was Democrats who angrily complained about secret backroom deals.
Now the roles are reversed.
CBS and the rest of the Lame Stream Media carried the water for Obama and helped him get elected. He could not have gotten better treatment from them if he had paid them to campaign for him (and maybe he did) so it is interesting that CBS would point out this glaring lie that is Obama. But in a fashion for which the LSM is known, CBS comes to the table just a little bit late in the discussion. From the start of this debate it was obvious that it would not be transparent and that Democrats were hiding in rooms with the doors closed negotiating under cover of darkness. Democrats went extremely covert after Town Hall meetings in August where constituents let them have it with both barrels. Rather than address constituent concerns or take a new look, Democrats hunkered down in bunkers away from the public’s eye. Welcome to the party CBS, even if you are many months too late.
How long before you report on the moon landing?
As for cover of darkness, a Pennsylvania Democrat looking to unseat Arlen Specter, says that the blame for the drop in public support falls squarely on the Democrats.
Rep. Joe Sestak blames Democratic leaders for the plunge in public support for overhauling the health care system, saying Wednesday they failed to defend proposals that helped carry the party to victories in 2008.
“They said it would be transparent. Why isn’t it?” said Sestak, a Delaware County Democrat, in a meeting with Tribune-Review editors and reporters. “At times, I find the caucus is a real disappointment. We aren’t transparent, not just to the public but at times to the members.” Pittsburgh Tribune
CBS is pointing out the Democrat’s lack of transparency and a Democrat is pointing out the same thing and blaming it, in part, for the lack of support. When Republicans complain about the lack of transparency we are greeted with assurances that this has been the most transparent administration and Congress in history.
Evidently, some of their own are finding that the only transparency involved is how transparent the lies are.
UPDATE: Jack Cafferty of CNN rips Obama on transparency and hopes voters remember this in the midterm elections.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: cbs, Democrats, health care, Obama, sestak, specter, transparency. lies
Senator Dodd Reduced Aviation Security
Dec 29, 2009 Political
Now that securing the nation’s airports is again on the front burner, after the failed Christmas Day terrorist attack, the Washington Examiner is reporting that one Senator introduced an amendment to reduce aviation security. The Examiner reports:
Back in July, Senator Chris Dodd, D-Conn., proposed an amendment reducing aviation security appropriations by $4.5 million in favor of firefighter grants — a notoriously inneffective[sic] program. In fact, the money was specifically “for screening operations and the amount for explosives detection systems.”
According to the report, Dodd reduced aviation security by $4.5 million to give the money “to line the pockets of a constituency that supported his presidential campaign in a big way.”
Politics over security, yep that sounds like a Democrat.
Obviously this had no impact on what took place on Christmas but one has to wonder what affect it is having now that security has been stepped up. Would that money have been used to buy more x-ray screeners that airports are now begging for? Would explosives detectors now be in place so that dogs would not have to do the job?
Senator Dodd is not likely to win reelection next year. His constituency is unhappy with his illegal sweetheart mortgage deal and his role in the collapse of the housing market.
The fact that he played politics with our security cannot sit too well with them either.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: aviation security, Democrats, dodd, national security, politics
Republicans Play Politics With Defense Spending Bill
Dec 19, 2009 Political
Oh the left is up in arms! The Defense Appropriations Bill is before the Senate and it is usually a bill that passes quickly but Republicans are using legal procedural tactics to delay the vote on the bill. The reason for this is obvious, they want to take up time with this bill to delay getting to the health care bill. This is perfectly acceptable and in no way harms the troops.
The bill had a cloture vote at 0100 this morning and Democrats got enough votes for cloture. They then immediately asked for the bill to be voted on but at least one Republican objected. This means there will be 30 hours of debate on the bill and it will be voted on Saturday morning at 0730. The defense funding ends at midnight but the delay to Saturday morning will not affect anything in defense.
The Republicans are smart to require all procedures to be followed and to use up time. If they can keep prolonging the health care debate by using parliamentary procedures and as long as it does not hurt the troops, which it does NOT, then it is OK.
Democrats are indignant about all of this and want to know how Republicans can do this to the troops. These guys have short memories and seem to forget all the times they opposed troop funding and delayed defense bills. The White House site is scolding the Republicans and using quotes from Republicans that were used in the past to oppose delaying funding the troops:
“Playing politics with the critical funding that our troops need now is political theater of the worst kind.” – Sen. John Cornyn, [Press Release, 4/26/07]
“We have plenty of time and plenty of opportunity to have political debates… but it’s just unconscionable to me to tie the hands of the very troops that we all say we support.” – Sen. John Cornyn, [Transcript, Senate Republican News Briefing, 4/10/07]
“Every day we don’t fund our troops is a day their ability to fight this war is weakened.” – Sen. Mitch McConnell, [Press Release, 3/31/07]
“No way to treat the troops, and it is entirely inconsistent with [Senators’] expressions of support for the troops.” – Sen. Mitch McConnell, [Congressional Record, 10/4/07]
“I don’t understand this attitude of, ‘We can play with; we can risk the lives of these troops by waiting until the last possible minute to get the funding to them.” – Sen. Jon Kyl, [FOX News Transcript, 4/10/07]
“Our obligation to those troops must transcend politics.” – Sen. Jon Kyl, [Press Release, 11/8/07]
All of these quotes were in response to Democrat opposition or delay with regard to troop funding bills. This list of quotes proves that Democrats were guilty of the very thing they are now acting high and mighty about. If Democrats were not guilty of the same thing in the past then these quotes would not exist.
The truth is that when the time for debate is over the bill will pass and all the Republicans will vote for it. They are just using all the time allotted for the debate.
Democrats act as if this delay will be the end of the world. When Obama took 90 days to decide on the troop request for Afghanistan the Democrats said he was deliberative and could not rush into a decision. Republicans use the 30 hours allotted for debate and they are the ones delaying the troops and causing harm.
Another point of contention in this bill is that Democrats added a “doc fix” to it. This is a non defense item that will raise the reimbursement to doctors under Medicare. This does not belong in the Defense bill but it was put in so it would be assured of passage. Putting it here rather than in the appropriations for Medicare allows Congress to hide the true cost of Medicare. This will go against defense when it really pays for Medicare. This is one of the accounting tricks I discussed in the past. The cost of Medicare is much higher than reported because of things like this, which happen every year.
This is the bill that Democrats wanted to add a 1.9 trillion dollar provision to raise the debt ceiling. They could have put it in the appropriate appropriations bill but were afraid they would not get cloture so they were going to put it in the defense bill where they knew they would. It was not added because of other concerns including demands for a balanced budget. If it had been added then I would have expected all Republicans to vote against it.
They would still get a defense bill and fast but it would be without the debt ceiling provision.
In any event, it is the Democrats who are playing politics with the defense bill. They wanted to use it to slip the debt ceiling provision in and they have included the “doc fix” both of which are political issues. Let’s get it clear, the only reason this is in the defense bill is because it will pass that way and so they can hide the true cost of Medicare. The impact on our debt does not change but they can hide the true cost of the Medicare program.
This is what they will do every year if health care overhaul is passed. They will put anything that adds to the cost in other bills to hide the cost and the deficit will continue to increase while they lie about why.
The bottom line is, regardless of all the grandstanding being done by Democrats, the bill will pass and the Republicans will vote for it. It will not hurt the troops or defense.
The Republicans are within their right to use the procedures and they did so. If the Democrats wanted this voted on before the deadline then they should have introduced it earlier. The delay is all their fault and it is a failure of leadership.
At least Republicans are doing things legally. The Democrats stopped the reading of an amendment this week and did so in complete violation of Senate rules. They just decided they were going to stop it and allow the sponsor to withdraw the amendment. This is a violation of Senate rules but that did not bother the Democrats.
Yet when Republicans use the rules the Democrats get upset.
The hypocrisy makes me sick.
I do love it though. This forces them to commute to the Senate chamber in the huge snowstorm that is heading toward DC.
How appropriate considering the snow job the Democrats are involved in.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: defense, Democrats, health care, hypocrisy, Republicans, senate rules, troops
Didn’t Obama Promise NO Earmarks?
Dec 18, 2009 Political
During the campaign for the presidency John McCain attacked the earmark process. McCain was in a good position to do so since he has used earmarks little, if at all. Barack Obama was one of the big time spenders with earmarks but he stopped using them because they were a liability. Then he took the same tough stance as McCain.
Just before Obama took office he promised an end to earmarks. He said he would not sign bills with earmarks in them and he specifically said that the stimulus would have NO earmarks. Remember, he was the guy bringing a new kind of politics to DC (the Chicago way, perhaps).
On his second day in Washington, President-elect Obama met with his budget team and promised no earmarks will be in the stimulus plan.
“We are going to ban all earmarks — the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review,” he explained. “We will create an economic recovery oversight board made up of key administration officials and independent advisors [sic] to identify problems early and make sure we are doing all we can to solve it.” MSNBC First Read Jan 6, 2009
The stimulus passed and it had earmarks in it. PolitiFact reports that they were there but only a small number. Maybe I am being too literal but “No earmarks” means NONE to me, not a small number of them.
Then the omnibus bill was passed and it had a ton of earmarks. There were nearly 9000 earmarks in that bill and Obama, the one who was going to end the earmark process, signed it. But that was only once and we will get it right from now on.
The Congress just passed a 1.1 trillion dollar spending bill and Obama signed it. So how did the guy who was going to end earmarks do on this one?
There were 5000 earmarks in this bill totaling 3.9 billion dollars.
This is a disgrace. It is bad enough when earmarks are added during good times but this country is on life support and we are out of money. We are borrowing money from China to pay our bills and the annual interest we pay on the loans is enough to completely fund several government agencies for the entire year. Adding earmarks to a bill when we are in such a bad way financially is irresponsible and demonstrates a complete disregard for our financial well being. It is wrong and Obama should have vetoed it.
Instead, he broke his promise and signed the bill, earmarks and all.
Another broken promise.
How is that Hope and Change working out for ya?
Related:
NPR
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: Democrats, earmarks, financial crisis, lies, Obama
Wasn’t The Stimulus Supposed To Create Jobs?
Dec 18, 2009 Political
The nearly 1 trillion dollar stimulus package that had to be passed immediately back when Obama took office was supposed to fix the economy and create jobs. Obama told us that unemployment would go way up without the stimulus but would top out at under 9% with it. We have an unemployment rate of 10% and this is an indication that either the stimulus did not work, they lied to us, or they did not know what they were talking about. I think it is a little of each.
Only about 20% of the stimulus money has been spent. It was supposed to be spent on “shovel ready” projects that would create jobs but no jobs are being created and it is obvious that the stimulus did not work. So what do you think Democrats do when their massive spending does not work? Why, they spend more. The Democrats in the House passed a 155 billion dollar jobs bill designed to go toward “shovel ready” projects and create jobs.
Forgive me, but wasn’t the first stimulus supposed to create jobs and be for “shovel ready” projects? If it did not work, why spend more money for the same thing? Since only 20% of the original stimulus has been spent, why commit more money? Shouldn’t they spend all the original stimulus before committing more money?
This is a sign that the first stimulus was a failure. It is an admission from Democrats that the massive spending did not help. Instead of being smart and realizing that more of the same was bad, they spent anyway.
The bill was touted as a job creator but it is political ploy. The Democrats are trying to show that they are on top of things by throwing more money at the problem. They are foolishly demonstrating that they have no concept of fiscal responsibility (which is their pattern) and they are doing so at their own peril.
Do they actually think Americans are so stupid we will not be able to see they are throwing good money after bad and that they are doing more of what has proven to be ineffective? Can’t they see the stupidity of committing more money to this when 80% of the original money has NOT been spent?
This is absolute stupidity and will end up costing them in the long run.
It will end up costing all of us in the long run…
Source:
al-Reuters
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: Democrats, foolishness, jobs bill, spending