Obama Stash

I don't know about you, but I think it's time for a dose of reality based on common sense. This is, admittedly, a rare commodity these days.

For on the one hand, there is euphoria on the middle left of the political spectrum while their brethren on the far left are enraged with a bitter sense of betrayal. On the other hand, the more conservative are contemplating a mass wrist-slashing in the light of that which they see as doom and gloom personified.

The issue, of course, is Obamacare which is no longer just the Holy Grail for some and imminent Armageddon for others, but is now the law of the land. Thus, it is time to sort out fact from fiction and promise from threat.

Most people in this country see their health plans renewed in November each year, at least that's when they make their selection of coverages for the year to come. So, while each option has an associated price tag, any changes don't become apparent until January. It's likely that, only then, will severe cases of "sticker shock" be observed.

It's possible that some people will see a 300% increase in their medical premiums! This is in stark contrast with the $2500 decrease, promised by Obama on the campaign trail, and in the runup to the passage of the healthcare bill.

But, I can hear Obama now as he will use this dichotomy to launch another attack on the insurance industry even though such an onslaught would be patently unfair and unjustified. Let's try to take the heat out of the argument and replace it with a healthy dose of light.

Even the casual listener to the arguments, both pro and con, will have gleaned a few facts about the new law. For a start, insurance companies cannot refuse coverage to anyone who applies. Nor can they even consider pre-existing conditions.

So what is to dissuade anyone from seeking to buy insurance only when they are sick? The answer in real terms is nothing. Oh, there will be fines for anyone who doesn't buy insurance, but considering the premiums, this might be the better option. How about not buying auto insurance until after the accident?

An insurance company just like any other business is required by statute to make a profit, or to try at least, and in the circumstances described above this will not be made any easier especially when the new law forbids them from singling out any one individual for higher premiums.

Thus, the only defense the company has is to consider the worst case scenario and charge higher premiums to everyone. And, it's no use the liberal left chanting that the so-called "public option", where the Federal Government becomes the insurance company, is the answer.

Well, that government is already broke, as we know. Thus, they shouldn't and won't tolerate any more losses than a private insurer. For it is an easily checked fact that governments raise money in only one of three ways. They print it, or they borrow it, or they collect it via taxation, but the end result is the same. We the American people pick up the tab, if not by higher taxes then through a devalued currency.

I had a deja-vu moment earlier this week when I heard a guy from the Carolinas declare that he was so happy that he now had health insurance because he didn't have to worry. "I'ts like Christmas," he gushed. The interviewer seemed disinclined to point out it would be at least four years before Santa was due, but whether that omission was due to ignorance, ill-placed compassion or political motivation was unclear.

Do you remember on the campaign that Obama held a Town Hall meeting in Florida when a woman begged him for a car and a house with kitchen? I wonder if she ever got either?

Then there was the woman in Detroit a few months ago who waited in line with thousands of others to apply for a housing grant. When she was asked where she believed the money was coming from she went up the line.

"From the City of Detroit," she offered hopefully.

"No, No," she corrected herself, "From the Government."

"No, No," she triumphantly concluded, "From Obama."

Her friend then added, "We're going to get some of that 'Obama stash', and that's why we voted for him."

Here are a few more facts in the aftermath of Obamacare passage. Pelosi is at 11% approval. Reid is at 7% and the 'Promised One' himself is at 46%.

And let's not forget that the Premier of one of Canada's provinces came to Florida for his personal medical care!

Of course, Obama has now turned to other things as he seeks " comprehensive immigration reform." This is "codespeak" for amnesty, and if Obama thought the healthcare issue was confrontational and unpopular, he hasn't seen anything yet.

So Obama bring it on !!!

Stupak is as Stupak Does .....

Last Saturday I took part in a demonstration which clearly demonstrated that the vast majority of the voters in this country were and are strongly opposed to the Senate healthcare bill. In spite of this, the House last night passed the legislation by a margin of 219 to 212.

Several days ago I predicted that Bart Stupak of the 1st Congressional district of Michigan would cave and so it transpired. So that was not remarkable in itself. What was remarkable though, almost to the apex of incredulity, was the manner of his capitulation.

For those readers on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean and the mouth-breathers in Lake Havasu City, I should explain that Congressman Stupak pretends to be of the “Pro-Life” persuasion and for several weeks he has objected to the inclusion of federal funding for abortion. Clearly this stance worried Obama as well as Nancy Pelosi and her whips especially as about a dozen other Democrat representatives reportedly stood with Stupak.

He, Stupak, resolutely maintained that promises to change legislation after the fact were not good enough for him and demanded actual verbiage before the vote. Cutting to the chase, Obama promised to issue an “Executive Order” banning the use of federal funds in order to kill babies. And, based on this, Stupak caved. Now even “Stupak the Stupid” must be aware of two problems with this subterfuge.

For a start, assuming that the order is issued and that, given Obama’s proclivity for Chicago-style political thuggery, is itself questionable but he could just as well rescind it at any time by claiming that it was untenable.

Now, on that issue, Obama may well be right as it is certain that the Abortion lobby would immediately file suit in Federal Court. There it is almost certain that their side would prevail as the court would rule that the law of the land trumps Executive Orders. Now I don’t know if Stupak figured all this out or not but it gave him the “out” he needed and he folded.

But, he can still claim to be standing by his principles. I don’t know about you but whenever I hear liberal politicians talk about principles or "love of country", I know we’re about to be shafted.

It is also rumored that 3 airports in Stupak’s district have been awarded a chunk of federal funding. Coincidence? Not in my book.

I listened to John McCain this morning on a local radio station who started to talk about repealing the entire healthcare monstrosity. For those from outside of Arizona, I should explain that he is in a dogfight to retain his party’s nomination when his Senate term is up in November. And with fuzzy thinking like that, I’m bound to say that it’s time for him to step aside.

Even assuming that Republicans exceed their wildest expectations in the mid-terms in November, it would take a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate to override a presidential veto. Simply put; that’s not going to happen.

So Obama will sign the bill tomorrow and, in the meantime, the action moves back to the Senate as the so-called “Reconciliation” proceedings get under way. I, for one, do not expect to see all the bribes such as the “Cornhusker kickback” or the “Louisiana Purchase” withdrawn. And, if they are not, again you’ll see challenges in Federal Court based upon a provision in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution which states that “all duties, imposts and exercises shall be uniform throughout the United States”.

In other words, everybody is supposed to be screwed equally which should make you feel better.

Not !!!!!!!

"Preserve, Protect and Ignore.........."

So now the new deadline for some action in the House on this healthcare fiasco has been pushed back yet again, this time to Sunday. By my unofficial count, this is the 9th such deadline that has come and gone. And it must be serious for Obama to defer his daughter’s Spring Break trip to Asia and Australia on Air Force One until June.

As I write, there is no “Reconciliation Bill” because it has not been written. So, as it stands right now, the Senate Bill still contains the:-

The “Cornhusker Kickback”.

The “Florida Gatorade” sweetener.

The Connecticut hospital deal.

The 500 Billion in Medicare cuts.

Federal funding for abortion.

A delay until 2018 before so-called “Cadillac plans” enjoyed by many unions will be taxed. No wonder that this very day, the AFL/CIO endorsed the Senate bill.

And, the now infamous, “Louisiana Purchase” is still in there.

Small wonder that reluctant Democrats fear a double-cross and they have good reason to do just that .

On television last night, Obama tried to justify all these and cited two examples. The first was relative to Louisiana where he cited Hurricane Katrina which happened more than 4 ½ years ago. The second example though was hilarious when he proffered Hawaii and declared the reason for the deal offered to the “Aloha State” was because of the earthquake.

Huh? What earthquake?

Now, should he not know all about the state where he was purportedly born? Clearly he confused Hawaii with Haiti. Well, they do both start with an H and an A and they both end in an I, so the confusion is understandable for any normal human being. But this is the Promised One, the Smartest Man in the World but perhaps that lack of a teleprompter rendered him mortal.

Or perhaps he thought Haiti was one of the Union’s 57 states he talked about on the campaign trail. Mind you, I think I know why he said that. At every meal he probably stares at a bottle of Heinz ketchup with a big “57” on its label.

Also, interesting, was Obama’s insistence that he didn’t concern himself with “Procedure” or “Process”. Well, I’m sorry to disillusion Barack but he is supposed to be a constitutional lawyer by profession and the Constitution of these United States is all about both process and procedure. I suggest he gives it a read one of these days starting with Article 1, Section 7.

After all, he swore an oath on the steps of the Capitol to protect that Constitution but I do not believe that oaths mean much to liberals or liars or lawyers. And rolled into one, the mixture is toxic.

I am convinced that Obama does not care how the healthcare thing winds up on his desk. In fact, I’ll go further. He does not care if a vote, any vote is taken at all.

Better yet, there would never be another vote ever again on anything he wants because, until now, nobody has ever told him “No”. And he doesn't want to take the chance.

O'Bama?

“I am not a crook”.

Those words are now infamous because they were uttered by a president who was a lawyer. And they will echo through the American conciousness for generations. Well, now we have another one and this one could utter them again before his term is over.

I’m not one; neither a president nor a lawyer and I haven’t played either on television but, I have read the Constitution and I do have a modicum of common sense. So here’s my take for whatever it’s worth. But, please let me add, if I were to become a lawyer, I would want to be constitutional one..

The president and the Democratic congressional leadership are fighting furiously to pass, with no Republican votes, the ever-less-popular health bill. An Associated Press poll last week shows that four in five Americans don't want the Democrats to pass a health care bill without bipartisan support, while almost all polls are showing support for the current bill to be at only 25 percent to 35 percent.

And all polls show high negative intensity.

The resistance of the People to passing so unpopular a bill is so powerful that it has driven Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Chairwoman of the Rules Committee Louise Slaughter, at least for the moment, to actually contemplate publicly violating the constitutional process for enacting laws.

Now remember, part of their oath when they first trudged up the steps to the Capitol, was “to preserve, protect and defend” the solemn provisions of that document. But now it seems that’s all gone out of the window. Under their announced scheme, instead of following the constitutional voting process:-

The House first votes for the Senate bill, then …

After that is signed into law by the president and the Senate passes the popular amendments that the House wants …

The House votes for that second Senate bill of amendments, which …

Obama then signs it into law.

Under the proposed scheme, the Senate bill would be "deemed" to have passed the House and become law without a presidential signature. Then the Senate would pass the House-demanded amendments, and the House members would then cast only one vote -- for the amendments they like, rather than the underlying Senate bill they hate.

Thus, (so Pelosi's theory holds) politically protecting House members, who could say they never actually voted for the publicly despised Senate bill.

But, as has been pointed out in several venues in the last few days, Article 1 Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution requires that before a bill becomes law, "Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it"; and, "in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively."

It is those two provisions of the Constitution that would be evaded: the House vote, with the names and votes of the individual members publicly published, and the president's signature.

That is James Madison's precise 18th century version of transparency and accountability and the Supreme Court has only recently emphasized that those procedures must be followed precisely.

It speaks to the sturdiness of the system which our founders installed that it is, as intended, so resistant to passing major legal and cultural changes against the overwhelming will of the public. So resistant that, in frustration, the Democratic speaker of the House has been driven to consider breaking her oath of office and violate the Constitution in order to get her way. Presumably, when she is better counseled, she will dismiss this wayward idea.

Should she follow through on her threat, however, the product would not be a law, but a nullity -- an aborted, inert thing.

It would be, in essence, an attempted congressional putsch against the Constitution.

But still our governing system would not be broken as long as the president would do his constitutional duty, as assuredly he should, and neither sign nor veto it, but rather, publicly declare it a nullity, tear it up and burn it, as one would a piece of trash. Because that is, precisely what it is. But, this president, who knows?

But I suspect I do and you do too.

And now you know why the old saying is that there are two things you don’t want to see made: Laws and Sausages.

And I would add one more; Fish Sticks!

Trust me, I’ve been there!

Erin Go Bragh

Entrails

I love this little cat or, more specifically, I love his grin. There is a game which, in Afghanistan is called “Buzkashi,” and it’s a bit like Polo without the strawberries and the Eton accents both real and assumed.

In this version, two teams of horse riders gallop at each other across a field of unspecified proportions and the lead horsemen from both sides lean over their saddles to try to grab the corpse of a dead goat, Then whoever gets it they keep on galloping towards the opponents goal line where the object is to throw or carry the poor benighted cadaver across the largely-undefined goal line.

Or, if the rider is certain that his way is irretrievably blocked, he can throw the goat to others on his team.

Needless to say, there is competition from the other riders on both sides for the dubious honor of being the scorer.

One thing is certain, by the time one team or the other wins, there is not a recognizable carcass left.

That game, or variants thereof, are played all over Central Asia and it seems the cult is spreading ……..

The latest venue is the Congress of these United States where sometimes the Senate does battle with the House and sometimes it’s the other way around. Except in Washington’s version of the game, there is a third super-player who seems to reside on Air Force One for most of the time and really doesn’t help the outcome much at all.

Now I don’t know if, back in Afghanistan, there is a referee. But there is here.

And still Democrats drag the entrails of healthcare across and into the dirt of this land as they try to ram it down our throats. Testosterone or whatever Pelosi’s hormone cocktail is, is not playing in Peoria, Illinois any better than it is Peoria, Arizona.

Pelosi, Reid, Obama; We the people are the referee! And the whistle is poised.

Still, Obama took yet another trip on Air Force One today, this time to Ohio. I haven’t heard what he said on this last junket nor do I care to as they’re all the same but I’m prepared to paraphrase.

“The time for talking is over”. So why does Obama keep talking about it?

“The American People are entitled to an up or down vote on healthcare”. OK, Obama, there comes a time in a bar fight or a gunfight or even in the school yard when the runt of the litter has had enough and he say’s “Bring it on”.

Clearly, the Democrats don’t have the votes or this monstrosity would be law by now.

And, slowly but surely, their motivation becomes clearer. One of Obama’s shills on TV yesterday opined that Federal-funded abortions must be in the bill because, otherwise, more unwanted babies would be born which would cost more money.

So, now it seems, it’s not about healthcare all, it’s much more about death for some before they draw a breath and rationing before they draw too many.

This is clearly the cornerstone of his legacy as he sees it

Let’s destroy it before the mortar sets which, after November, wil see this presidency done. And that could only be good.

Hell hath no fury ----------

Sometimes, when I sit down at this keyboard I stare at my notes and I don’t know where to start. Scarier yet is sitting down at the same keyboard with no idea where the post will finish. What conclusion could a reader take away? What conclusion do I want a reader to take away?

But today, I decided to take a different tack for, in the absence of any message or theme or topic which leaped out at me, I went in search of another commonality. And I found one. And that commonality is sex.

Now don’t get me wrong as it’s not meant to indicate any sense of prurience in the text which follows but merely my sources.

For a start, I received the words below from a woman I know in Northern California. I will go no further with identification for reasons which are obvious to me and to her, but she wrote:

“I really, really wanted to believe in his promises (not that he got my vote), but almost from the beginning I could see a 'change' in his demeanor (like he was holding back his true feelings of total smugness). Just as I tried to support Clinton … ugh, the day he wagged that finger, I wanted to shove it down this throat. I never could call him President …………….

“The only consolation I have is that from all the anger (misdirected or not; misconstrued or not) will turn things around come November. I hear it from all corners of the States”

Strike One Obama

Then there was Pelosi’s truly amazing statement which I reported on a few posts ago that, “We must pass the healthcare bill so we can all see what’s in it”.

Then she followed that idiocy with yet another and here it is, paraphrased, I admit.

“Imagine a society where you don’t have to stay in your day-job when what you really want to do is paint, or be a photographer or write. But you know that you dare not leave that job because you need to provide care for a bi-polar dependent.”

So, now let me get this straight. Do you Speaker Pelosi want me to provide healthcare for those who want to paint pictures? It’s a worthy and sometimes an all consuming drive. Just ask Van Gogh. But I’m supposed to pick up the cost of reattaching his ear?

And what about the mandatory requirement for every American to buy insurance or pay a fine of $8500 per year or maybe even go to jail? Where's a "starving artist" supposed to come with that kind of green?

Strike Two Obama

Then there was Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC earlier this week, whining as only she can, to an interviewee, whose name I don’t recall, “But what happens if we don’t get healthcare through. His power is gone – it’s over.”

Then she went on, “You have to get it done for him”.

Or is it HIM?

Strike Three Obama

But, after all that, if you’d like a little relief, click on the link below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tcahn7PwQU&feature=player_embedded>

And, before you ask; The above link came from a woman too and so did the picture at the top.

Happy Daylight Savings Time

The Slaughter of the Innocents

You can take the thug out of Chicago but you cannot take the thug out of the thug.

Then meld Chicago thuggery with San Francisco-style Italian Mafia tactics and you wind up with that which we have now; which seems to be a callous suspension of democracy in this country.

Clearly, Pelosi does not have the votes in the House of Representatives to pass the Senate’s version of healthcare reform. And they pulled out all the stops including offering a seat on the federal bench to the brother of a Democratic waverer. And so, what does Pelosi do? She called a meeting this morning behind closed doors, where else, to concoct a way out of the mess as she sees it.

As it seems now, the House will “deem” themselves to have passed the Senate Bill. What happened to Obama’s demand over the last couple of weeks “for an up or down vote”? Well, as soon as it became clear that the measure was going to fail in the House, the tactic changed.

A whole bunch of Blue Dog Democrats are breathing a sigh of relief because now they don’t have to face their constituents when they go home for Passover/Easter break. Of course, it won’t save them in November and earlier today I told my representative, one Harry Mitchell of District 5 in Arizona, precisely that. His office did not sound surprised.

The messenger from the White House was one Louise Slaughter who is a close confidant of the “Great One” and she was the one who came up with the strategy now known as the Slaughter rule.

Whatever the Feds do, they’re going to be stuck with one inescapable fact, Arizona is one of 36 plus states of the Union which is preparing to exempt itself from the strictures of Obamacare. Perhaps at some point, the whole mess will wind up in the United States Supreme Court.

And, as of the last State of the Union speech, Obama has fewer friends there now as he unashamedly attacked the third and equal branch of government.

But Obama doesn’t get that.

But he will ………………