Evil PhRMA Once Again Democrats’ Friend
Jul 8, 2010 Political
We all know that (mmm mmm mmm) Barack Hussein Obama talks a good game and says what people want to hear but then does what he wants to. He said no lobbyists but they donated to him and he has hired them to work in his regime. He said he would close Gitmo and did not. He said his people did not speak to Blago about his open Senate seat but they did. So we know he is a liar and we know that he will asy or do anything for political gain, especially when it comes to pushing his Socialist agenda.
Wall Street is full of bad guys and Obama gives them a tongue lashing and promises financial reform. They happen to be huge donors to him and other Democrats so the financial rules will help them immensely.
Obama also painted the pharmaceutical companies as evil and regularly bashed them during the health care takeover debate. While he was speaking to America about how evil they are he was behind closed doors cutting deals that favor them for inclusion in the health care bill.
The evil Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) [and all the affiliated drug companies] are not really all that evil to Obama and they don’t mind being slapped around publicly as long as they get their rewards for being the whipping boys. And they have been rewarded handsomely for their efforts.
Harry Reid helped push the health care bill through so the drug companies owe him quite a bit and to show their thanks they have been contributing a great deal of money to his campaign. They want him reelected because they know he will look out for them rather than for the American citizens and the people of his home state. Harry Reid sold out the majority of Americans in favor of the drug companies (among many special interest groups) and they want to continue that relationship. They need their own personal stooge in the government to help them get sweetheart deals at the expense of taxpayers.
The drug companies are not only donating lots of money to Reid but have also paid for TV ads in support of him. I reckon that the libs are not really all that upset with the SCOTUS ruling that says companies can spend as much as they want or Reid, as a matter of principle, would not accept the help. Of course, Reid is not a man of principle or he would not have sided with PhRMA over the people.
Barack Obama made the drug companies his regular patsy and made them out to be friends of Republicans. If you believe Obama and his Democrats then you would think that the drug companies gave lots and lots of money to Republicans while the lowly Democrats were fighting against their evil ways.
The reality is, Obama and the rest of the Democrats are quite friendly with PhRMA and take lots of money. Obama will be in Nevada next week to do a fundraiser for Reid so it will be like old home week with Obama and Reid there and the drug companies financing things.
Do you think Obama will bash them and tell them not to spend their money on Reid? After the insult he threw at the SCOTUS in his State of the Union Address one would think Obama is so opposed he would demand that it stop.
No, these people only want to win and they do not care how they do it. They will run a massive Democrat voter registration drive and call it immigration reform and they will make bogey men out of businesses that they are in bed with all in order to look like they are taking up for the little guy when what they are really taking is lot of special interest money.
The next time some liberal/progressive twit (like Obama or Reid) starts talking about Republicans being in bed with the drug companies inform the moron that the Democrats took lots of money from the drug companies and gave them sweetheart deals as part of the health care takeover.
Point them to this post or the linked article and ask them to explain why Harry Reid takes so much PhRMA money.
Its because these guys are in bed with the special interests and will do anything to retain power.
Vote them all out in November and cripple Obama’s agenda.
Source:
Washington Examiner
Never surrender, never submit.
[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: drug companies, hypocrites, liars, lobbyists, Obama, phrma, Reid, special interests
Where Is Pelosi To Denounce This?
Mar 30, 2010 Political
Nancy Pelosi was all weepy one day discussing the terrible rhetoric that she hears and stated that she has heard it in the past and it led to violence. Of course, the violence she was talking about was the murder of Harvey Milk and George Moscone in San Francisco. The murderer, Dan White, was a Democrat and it was over a political dispute involving White’s job.
So Pelosi made this big deal in order to marginalize those opposed to the current administration’s actions. These TEA Party members are some violent folks, you know.
Except at every TEA Party event, there have been no confirmed reports of violence involving them. Some of the TEA Party members have been attacked by the other side but the members themselves have not resorted to violence even though the left is provoking them in hopes of making them turn violent.
Since this is obviously not working, the left has resorted to manufacturing violence. At the ceremony where members of the Congressional Black Caucus walked arm in arm to the Capitol several claimed they were spat upon and that they were called the N word. There is no evidence that these incidents took place. So far no video has surfaced to show that it happened. If that evidence existed we would have seen it non stop on the MSM. Olberman would loop it and play it for the entirety of his show.
It did not happen. Andrew Breitbart however, is offering a cash reward (now up to $100,000) for video evidence that it did. I think his money is safe.
So this gets play in the MSM but once calls for evidence go out they have nothing. What next? Take a small number of calls threatening violence and couple them with a few acts of vandalism and blame them on the TEA Party and right wingers. There is no way of knowing who did this, only speculation. The very left that calls people Islamophobes for saying that a Muslim was involved in a bombing incident are quick to indict the right for acts that could have been done by anyone.
If black lawmakers will invent a racist story to advance the party line then it is not beyond reason that the left was involved in these incidents in order to pin the blame on the right.
Make no mistake, the people who committed the vandalism and who made the threats need to be found and dealt with appropriately. But let’s find them and determine ideology before we make claims. Even then, the nut jobs involved are the only ones responsible.
For real violence, Andrew Breitbart tells of Harry Reid supporters who threw eggs at the TEA Party express bus and threatened him with harm. Since we must apply the same standard, I will need some evidence that this happened so if anyone has video, please post it. [See update below]
We do know that the left is engaged in many acts of violence and vandalism. They slash tires, break windows (sometimes their own party’s), and bite off fingers.
Sometimes they even have members of the New Black Panther Party stand outside polling places with nightsticks intimidating voters.
But the violence claim is aimed (is aimed a word that incites violence) at TEA Party members who have been peaceful.
This is by design because they know they are in trouble and need to marginalize the opposition if they hope to avoid a bloodbath in November.
Let’s keep our powder dry (oops, another phrase linked to violence) and focus on our agenda. Don’t be goaded into violence.
This is what they want.
And the last thing we want to do is give them what they want.
UPDATE: I asked for it and I got it. The video that shows eggs hitting the TEA Party bus, a guy holding an egg and a moron saying it was TEA Party people who threw the eggs is now available. There is also a man threatening Andrew Breitbart, he says that if Breitbart does not leave “I am going to jail today.” So it looks like Breitbart backed up his claims with video. Can the Congressional Black Caucus do the same with regard to the alleged racist remarks and spitting directed at them?
Never surrender, never submit.
[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]
No True Pro-Life Democrats And None With Principles
Mar 22, 2010 Political
Bart Stupak and his cohorts who claimed to be pro-life are nothing more than typical Democrats who put party before principle. Stupak pushed for anti abortion language in the original House bill and he vowed not to vote for the Senate Bill unless language was added that would take away the funding for abortion. By mid-afternoon today he had changed his mind and decided to vote yes.
Did he do it because language had been added to the “fix-it” bill? Did he do it because one of his eight proposals was adopted?
No, he did it because Barack Obama promised to sign an Executive Order spelling out what is and what is not allowed. Stupak gave his yes vote for a promise that Obama would sign a piece of paper that cannot change a law (if there is a court battle the law will win) and that can be rescinded at any time by Obama or future presidents. Stupak became a Dupe-Hack. And he demonstrated that there is no way for one to actually be pro-life and be a Democrat. When push came to shove the Democrat shined through and the so called principled position took a back seat. As Phyllis Schlafly wrote:
“It is naive for any elected official, especially one who describes himself as ‘pro-life,’ to expect that a promise to issue an Executive Order that reasserts the intentions of the Hyde Amendment will be fulfilled by the most pro-abortion president to ever sit in the White House. Perhaps Mr. Stupak and his fellow pro-life Democrats forget that President Obama’s first Executive Order was the repeal of the Mexico City Policy to allow for international funding of abortion.”
“Not only would an Executive Order be rendered meaningless in the face of Congress passing legislation which actively provides for the massive expansion and funding of abortion services, but anyone who doubts the abortion tsunami which awaits this bill becoming law lives in a fantasy world.”
~snip~
“Mr. Stupak and his Democrat followers have now clarified that you cannot be pro-life and be a Democrat. If abortion was truly their biggest issue, they wouldn’t willfully align themselves with the Party of Death.”
“This vote will expose the myth of the ‘pro-life Democrat.’ With this single vote, the Democratic Party will divide our nation into the Party of Death and the Party of Life, and future elections will never be the same.” Yahoo News
There is no doubt, barring a miracle like a sink hole swallowing the Capitol, that this will pass in the House. I have a feeling that the Senate version of the bill will not only be signed into law but will remain the law minus the so called “reconciliation fixes” because many items in the bill are not budget items and will be struck down. Democrats do not have the votes to over rule the motion to remove the items in question. In fact, the entire reconciliation bill might end up being tossed because it contains items dealing with Social Security and reconciliation bills cannot contain any SS items in them.
Republicans have been trying to discuss this with Senate Democrats but they are all out of reach. Republicans claim that the Senate Democrats are slow walking in order to have the House vote on the Senate bill first so that their bill will become the law of the land.
I do not like this entire mess and I know it will further divide our country while bankrupting us despite what liberals claim. They do not know what they are talking about and see things through the intoxication of Kool Aid and some really good weed.
I do think though, that it would be absolutely hysterical if the Senate bill passes and they cannot deliver on reconciliation like Reid promised. Many Democrats will be unhappy and left hanging in the wind.
Now that will be funny. At least we can all laugh while on the road to ruin.
[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]
To Reconcile Or Not To Reconcile
Feb 26, 2010 Political
The health care summit was held yesterday and I don’t think Obama and the Democrats were ready for the Republicans who came ready to discuss issues. In the end the thing was a waste of time because Obama’s position was basically, here is what I want now sign on or we will have to use reconciliation.
What? Come now Big Dog. Reconciliation was addressed a number of times by Republicans and the Democrats said that no one was discussing using it. As an aside, please do not get confused between reconciliation and the filibuster as Rachael Maddow did. Harry Reid said this:
No one has said — I read what the President has online — no one has talked about reconciliation but that’s what you folks have talked about ever since that came out, as if it’s something that has never been done before.” (“Transcript: White House Health Summit, Morning Session,” Kaiser Health News, 2/25/10)
So there you have it right from Harry Reid, no one has been discussing this except the Republicans who are getting all worked up over nothing.
According to The Hill, Harry Reid was interviewed and in a posting from 2/20/10 Reid was indeed discussing reconciliation.
“I’ve had many conversations this week with the president, his chief of staff, and Speaker Pelosi,” Reid said during an appearance Friday evening on “Face to Face with Jon Ralston” in Nevada. “And we’re really trying to move forward on this.”
The majority leader said that while Democrats have a number of options, they would likely use the budget reconciliation process to pass a series of fixes to the first healthcare bill passed by the Senate in November. These changes are needed to secure votes for passage of that original Senate bill in the House.
“We’ll do a relatively small bill to take care of what we’ve already done,” Reid said, affirming that Democrats would use the reconciliation process. “We’re going to have that done in the next 60 days.”
Remember now, Harry Reid was before America at the summit and said no one was discussing this. No one was discussing it except him, Pelosi, Obama and his staff. All of these no ones have been discussing reconciliation.
So, if as Obama says, no one cares how this gets done or America does not care about the procedures, why did Harry Reid lie?
The reality is that a lot of people do not like this bill. People like parts of it but they do not like it, especially how much it will cost and all the unnecessary things that give government more control over our lives. Reid lied because he knows people do not like it and it would be real difficult for him to explain why reconciliation has been decided upon prior to the summit.
Reid is a liar and he will lose come this November.
Remember folks, never trust a Democrat. The summit was full of deception and theater so they could say they tried.
[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: lies, Obama, reconciliation, Reid, summit
How Black Republicans Feel About What Reid Said
Jan 11, 2010 Political
From Frances Rice, NBRA:
Wielding a sharp racial sword, Democrats ruthlessly destroy the careers of Republicans on racial matters, accepting no apologies. Yet, using a glaring double standard, those same Democrats quickly give a pass to any Democrat, such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who again displayed egregious racism.
Hardly a ripple of protest was made in 2004 when Reid shamelessly slurred Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as an incompetent Negro who could not write good English. “Slap at Thomas stinks of racism,” was the headline of the New York Daily News’ December 7, 2004 editorial.
Now, Reid has described then-Senator Barack Obama as “light skinned” and “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” With this racial slur, Reid denigrates not only Obama, but also the entire population of black Americans as being uneducated Negroes who cannot speak standard English, the same type of disgusting remark he made over five years ago about Justice Thomas, a graduate of Yale Law School. A tribute to Justice Thomas [link in original] that includes details about his stellar career is posted on the NBRA website. Read the rest
It strikes me that Al Sharpton said Reid’s comments disturbed him but that it was not the same as what Lott said. Lott was praising a 100 year old man and he made the comment that if Thurmond had been elected in 1948 we would not have these problems. It is only speculation as to what Lott meant but he apologized all over for offending people. Though Diane Feinstein says no Democrats jumped up and down about it she was actually one of those who did as did Barack Obama. How is it that Reid’s apology allows him a pass and Lott’s did not?
I remember Barack Obama saying that he could not be accountable for his association with a man who did despicable things when he (Barack) was only 8 years old. When Strom Thurmond ran for the presidency in 1948 Lott was 7 years old.
How can we hold him accountable for what he said about a guy who ran for president under segregation when Lott was only 7 unless we can now believe that Obama is guilty by association with Ayers?
What Lott said was wrong depending on what he meant. He never explained that. What Reid said was wrong unless he can tell us not what he meant, that has been explained, but whether he also holds those beliefs. If this had been Reid’s only foray into the world of racism then it might be excused but, as the NBRA piece points out, Reid made a racist remark about Justice Thomas.
The other thing that people miss in this is the implication of what Reid said and that is that Obama is attractive because he is not your typical black guy (before you lefties call that racist remember you gave Obama a pass on the typical white person remark).
The explanation is that Reid was saying that Obama was attractive to Americans because he is light skinned and does not speak negro. Does this not mean he believes that the racists in America will not vote for a dark skinned person who speaks negro, whatever that is.
Americans will vote for a person who can lead regardless of color (and as has been shown with Obama and Carter, they will vote for someone who can’t lead regardless of color). And since the left bashed Bush daily about his manner of speech we have to assume that speech is not a big issue with regard to getting elected.
I wish Reid were held to the same standards as a Republican but that is never going to happen as long as liberals continue to excuse racism from the left. So, since he will not be forced to step down, it will be just as much fun watching this brain damaged moron bumble his way through life and it will be even more fun watching him be removed by the voters.
Barack Obama said it would be up to Republicans to drive Lott out. They did but as Obama showed by accepting Reid’s apology, he does not hold Democrats to the same standard.
Maybe when it is all said and done Obama can have a beer summit with Reid and invite Robert Byrd to explain racism and the history of the Democrat organization known as the KKK.
Might be a bit much to ask since Reid and Byrd might expect Obama to serve the beer. After all, a few years ago he would have been getting Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy coffee…
[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: Al Sharpton, frances rice, nbra, Obama, racism, Reid, trent lott