The Democrats Plan Revealed

Over the last few days the Democrats plan for dealing with the $14,300,000,000,000 debt of this country can be summed up in 3 words:

BLAME THE REPUBLICANS!

That’s it. That’s all they want or need.

Nothing else matters as they want you to blame the Republicans in the most hyper-partisan act in American History in 150 years.

It’s the Perfect POLITICAL solution.

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

I didn’t say anything about economic solutions because neither are the Democrats.

The Republicans propose a plan (3 now) and the democrats just demagogue it into the ground and refuse to even vote on it.

Hell, they haven’t even passed their own budget (in the Senate) in 819 days!

Why do they need to commit to anything. They just demagogue whatever the Republican put up and the Ministry of Truth Media demagogues it to death and you buy the bullshit! It’s a perfect solution.

So what if it cause a depression that destroy the country for generations and possible crashes the world’s economy…like they care. As long as they win…who cares!

So what if this depression crushes the very people they are allegedly “protecting” in their demagoguery…The poor. Like they actually care.

If they can get the very people who are hurt by them to blame the other guy and flock to them and suckle at the government tits so much the better! It’s what they wanted all along. It’s a win-win for them.

As long as they aren’t to blame what does it matter how ugly it gets. And they calculate that they will win politically in 2012 from it. Political Capital is the only capitalism that Democrats believe in.

So where’s the downside for them??

Class Warfare. Demagoguery. Fearmongering. Dishonesty. It’s all Good.

The country can go completely to hell because that is irrelevant compared to the potential political gains they feel they will receive and are entitled to.

And the In-The-Tank Liberal Media will cheerleading them all the way.

The Republicans keep proposing plan after plan and the Democrats just turn their noses up at it like a 4 year old who’s told to eat their peas. 🙂

The Democrats just spread fear, intimidation, threats, and class warfare.

Divide and Conquer.

But as long as the Republicans are blamed for it that’s all that really matters in the end because then the Democrats can sweep into power in 2012 and really have no opposition to their Socialist Utopian vision. And that is the ultimate goal.

People so dependent on the Government that they have no choice but to keep the Democrats in power for generations and the longer and deeper it becomes the harder and harder it will be to pry them out of power and eventually it may even come to a point where people would wonder why you’d want to in the first place.

The Democrats dreams come true.

So why would they bother with an actual plan to fix the actual problem? They don’t need one, so why would they agree to one?

They wouldn’t.

But they key is, they have to keep the blame on the Republicans.

And the Republican have to keep acting like the school nerds who is constantly getting beat up by the school bully.

That’s they key.

So the question then becomes, are you that easy to manipulate?

I think so.

Baaaaaaaaa! 😦

In a series of phone calls, administration officials have told bankers that the administration will not allow a default to happen even if the debt cap isn’t raised by the August 2 date Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner says the government will run out of money to pay all its bills, including obligations to bond holders. Geithner made the rounds on the Sunday talk shows saying a default is imminent if the debt ceiling isn’t raised, and President Obama issued a similar warning during a Friday press conference after budget negotiations with House Republicans broke down.

A senior banking official told FOX Business that administration officials have provided guidance to them that even though a default is off the table, a downgrade “is a real possibility for no other reason than S&P and Moody’s have to cover (themselves) since they’ve been speaking out on the debt cap so much.”

This guidance is a big reason why Wall Street has largely dismissed the possibility of default, and though the markets have been jittery amid the talk of default, they haven’t imploded as would be the case, many economists fear, if the nation missed a payment on its debt.

Obama has offered nothing, instead just attacking, attacking, attacking, blaming everyone but himself in utter denial of the reality that no man on the face of this Earth is more responsible for our debt catastrophe than he.

Leadership anyone? anyone?

Sorry, all we have is a Community Organizer who only understands threats and intimidation not Leadership. And even since the days of Senator Obama when he voted “present” more often than he ever voted at all, he doesn’t like to take a stand for anything that isn’t beneficial to him personally. So that’s why we get nothing but campaign speeches from him.

He isn’t going to lead the nation. He is just going to lead himself to re-election. That’s all that matters to him.

So what if the nation goes down the toilet, as long as he get re-elected, and re-elected with a Democrat majority he’s good.

This president who now tells us we must raise taxes to save the Republic is the same president who just seven months ago was telling us that everyone agrees the worst thing one could do during a crisis is raise taxes. Republicans agreed then and hold to that position now. That makes them unreasonable, unbalanced.

And where did this sudden spurt of media fiscal discipline come from, anyway? Where were they when America needed someone to ask Obama, Pelosi and Reid how they were going to pay for TARP? Where were the media demanding to know where the trillion bucks for the anti-stimulus program was coming from? How about the trillion for Obamacare?

They went along for the ride on all these budget-busting disasters. And now they have the temerity to lecture us on fiscal discipline?

There is the oblivious. Some journalists refuse to acknowledge that spending has soared under Obama. When Grover Norquist factually noted Obama’s binge, CNN anchor Ali Velshi erupted in protest. “Wait a minute! ‘He created with his spending’? You didn’t just suggest that our budget problem is because of President Obama, did you, Grover?” Norquist said yes, he wasn’t kidding. Velshi dismissed this concept as unreasonable: “OK, we’re going to pass by that question because that’s an unreasonable position.”

In round numbers: In fewer than four years, Obama has increased the debt by $4 trillion. He proposes we raise it another $2.3 trillion. This makes Obama responsible for almost half the debt of the United States. But it is “unreasonable” to say so.

The leftist news media aren’t coming to this debate to be an honest broker. They’re just trying to break one side apart, and never mind that it’s their vision that is driving us right over a cliff. (Brent Bozell)

As long as The Democrats and The Liberals  win the Political battle nothing else matters to them.

After all, what will be left will be solely dependent on them and what better outcome for them could their possibly be?

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Bob GorrellPolitical Cartoons by Lisa BensonPolitical Cartoons by Nate Beeler




To Be Fair

After emerging from a lunch meeting on Thursday with members of her party and Jack Lew, the White House budget director, Ms Mikulski said her colleagues were feeling “volcanic” about the prospect of a $3,000bn (aka 3 Trillion) deal to cut deficits and raise the debt ceiling that did not include any higher taxes, adding that it was “like Mount Vesuvius” in the room.

Harry Reid, the US Senate majority leader, added: “This can’t be all cuts, there has to be a balance.”  We have to screw someone!

Facing a possible revolt from within Democratic ranks, White House officials immediately dismissed the notion that the president would strike any agreement with Republicans to implement significant spending cuts – including reform of treasured government programmes such as Medicare and Social Security – without garnering any new revenue in return  (aka TAX INCREASES). They also invited Democratic leaders back to the White House for a second straight day of talks in an effort to shore up their support in the negotiations.

Democrats are still expected to back whatever deal President Barack Obama strikes with congressional Republicans, but Thursday’s discontent highlighted the delicate balancing act facing White House officials as they go back-and-forth between the parties in search of a compromise.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, “compromise” to a Liberal means do exactly as I say, and only what I say,  and shut and sit down you idiot!

Mind you, on Dec 6th, 2010 Obama said raising Taxes in a recession was a bad idea. But that was a politically calculated move of the moment. Now 7 months later he has to forget he ever said and the media will be glad to oblige. Also, he ardent supporters will have forgotten it also. And if you remind the they will blow it off because they are of the moment only. What do we want now is all that matters.

Dec 6,2010 Whitehouse.gov: Make no mistake:  Allowing taxes to go up on all Americans would have raised taxes by $3,000 for a typical American family. And that could cost our economy well over a million jobs.

But now IF WE DON’T RAISE TAXES Armageddon is upon us!!! Run For the Hills!!!

Obama Now, in this moment (trying to appear to be a centrist instead of the left wing ideologue because he’s running for re-coronation):

“Regardless of what you feel about the particular policies — some of you may have supported the wars or opposed the wars; some of you may have agreed with the Recovery Act; some of you may be opposed — regardless of your views on these various actions that were taken, the fact is they all cost money,” he said. “And the result is that there’s simply too much debt on America’s credit card.”

He added, “Neither party (Just the Republicans!) is blameless for the decisions that led to this problem, but both parties have a responsibility to solve it.”

But when the Republican propose, the Democrats dispose. So again, it comes down to kiss the Democrats ass or else. Now that’s a compromise!! 😦

“The one thing we can’t do — cannot do — is decide that we are not going to pay the bills the previous congresses have already racked up,”

But we can threatened and scare seniors with false claims of not paying their bills to stoke up the class warfare and fearmongering.

If you take in $200 billion a month and Social Security cost $50 billion the only reason you’d wouldn’t pay that first is if your try to extort and exploit people.

“We can’t just close our deficit with spending cuts alone, because if we take that route it means that seniors would have to pay a lot more for Medicare, or students would have to pay a lot more for student loans,” he said.

And what will cuts in these programs that have to be made to make any kind of deficit reduction even possible do to them?

Or if you do nothing and they crash and burn on their own in less than 10 years?!

You guessed it!

But don’t tell the President, he’s running for re-coronation so he doesn’t want to say it, even if it is the truth.

He’s trying to look “fair”. 😦

And we have the tried and true Democrat strategy of “Vote for me the other guy’s an asshole!”. The fact that I might be an even bigger asshole doesn’t enter into equation.

“If we only did it with cuts, if we did not get any revenue (TAX INCREASES!!) to help close this gap between how much money is coming in and how much money is going out  (yeah just not spending too much isn’t enough meat for your base is it), then a lot of ordinary people would be hurt and the country as a whole would be hurt. And that doesn’t make any sense. It’s not fair.”  (Oh there’s that word “fair”!!! ooh it makes me all tingly!)

And you morons keep spending more than you take in we ALL get hurt. But that’s not important right now… So says the Guy who was going to be the Great Uniter of the country and govern for all the people, not just Democrats. 😦

“fairness” and “compromise”. Bend over here comes the greatest enema of all time!

Adhering to the standard Democratic talking points, Time managing editor Rick Stengel told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer during the 6 p.m. EDT hour of The Situation Room that if tax rates go up in 2013, it’s “not a tax hike,” demanding that “this is something that Republicans have to get used to.”

On the CNN poll, one thing no one at CNN is mentioning, is that question #23: Do you want Cut, Cap and Balance? Sixty-six percent of the American people want it. Question #25: Do you want a balanced budget amendment? Seventy-four percent! This is CNN’s own poll and they’re not reporting it tonight. (MRC)

So bend over here it comes!!!!

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

NO FearMongering Here!

Brilliant Listen: Ted Nugent on KFYI

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

“It is unfair to ask seniors to get less in benefits and wait longer to get onto Medicare — all while Republicans back tax breaks for Big Oil and corporations that ship American jobs overseas,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) “Just like the Republican plan to end Medicare, this proposal is unacceptable, especially for struggling middle-class Americans.”

But don’t worry, it’s all those Republicans fault that we can’t deal with the problem. And let’s throw in some Class Warfare will we are at it!

Do the Democrats ever mention the $500 Billion ObamaCare cut from Medicare and then double-counted it as savings? Naw, why would they when they can just straight for the fear and class warfare.

“A plan that slashes Medicare for vulnerable seniors is a plan that slashes Medicare for vulnerable seniors no matter what co-sponsors you put on it,” said Protect Your Care spokesman Eddie Vale. “This so called ‘plan’ is just as dangerous for seniors as the Republican budget that ends Medicare.”

“We believe the right way to strengthen Medicare is to improve the quality and lower the cost of care throughout the health care system,” said AARP’s Nancy LeaMond. “Simply shifting the bill to seniors does nothing to improve health care quality or combat the real problem of rising costs.”

Yet, the one program that was working, Medicare Advantage will be savaged by Obamacare in favor of the less efficient and more expensive MediGap.

Gee, I wonder which one AARP favors?  Do you even have to ask… 🙂

Debt Ceiling: The president called on Republicans to back off their “stubborn” refusal to compromise on their “sacred cow” (no tax hikes), asserting that everyone else at the table has displayed a willingness to do so.  This is news to me, as Democrats have consistently refused to deal seriously with entitlements, and have shamelessly demagogued Republican reform efforts.  One could also argue that Democrats’ true sacred cow in this debate is their insistence on raising taxes, a stance from which they have not backed down.

And the Democrats only want “revenue increases” the new Orwellian term for TAX INCREASES! And anything else is just stupid in their minds. But don’t worry, it’s the Republican’s fault for being intractable.

“I am the President of the United  States, and I want to make sure I’m not engaged in fear-mongering.”   Republicans should file this quote away and resurrect it whenever the  president feeds his insatiable appetite for precisely the practice he  claims to reject.  In fact, he fear-mongered at today’s press  conference.  He can’t help himself.  Absent tax increases, he warned,  children could go without scholarships, food safety measures could be  loosened, and medical research could dry up, etc, etc.  It’s fat-cat  corporate jet-setters vs. the children, you see.  I’d try to accumulate Obama’s greatest fear-mongering hits, but that task could consume my entire afternoon. (But I am considering starting a blog about it…)

“If we do not have revenues (aka TAX INCREASES!), that means there are a bunch of kids out there who are not getting college scholarships.  If we do not have those revenues, then the kinds of cuts that would be required might compromise the National Weather Service.  It means that we would not be funding critical medical research.  It means that food inspection might be compromised.  And I’ve said to some of the Republican leaders, you go talk to your constituents, the Republican constituents, and ask them are they willing to compromise their kids’ safety so that some corporate jet owner continues to get a tax break.  And I’m pretty sure what the answer would be.”

So it’s Armageddon if we don’t have Tax Increases!! And he’s absolutely not fearmongering!!!! 🙂

But it’s the Republican’s “sacred cows” that are the problem!

And the Left has no “sacred cows” that are a problem. 🙂

DEBT: Obama demanded that legislators “do their job” on the debt crisis.  Um,  Mr. President, the Republican-controlled House did its job on the debt.   It passed Paul Ryan’s budget, which reduces the debt by four trillion  dollars, reforms the tax code, and saves the social safety net by  distrupting its inexorable march toward insolvency.  The Democrat-held  Senate has not done its job.  791 days have passed since Harry Reid’s caucus even introduced a  budget.  Oddly, the president failed to mention these salient facts.   He did, however, demand that Congress make “tough choices.”  Is he  referring to the brand of politically risky leadership he’s deliberately avoided?

July 8th, 2011 will be 800 days since the Democrats passed a budget AT ALL.

“I’m the President of the United States not running off of scare tactics,” Treasury Secretary Geithner.

In a ham-fisted class warfare gambit, Obama took aim at tax breaks for  private jet owners.  His point, presumably, was to highlight an  unpopular tax provision Republicans are “protecting” through their  blanket refusal to entertain any tax increases.  Say, where’d those evil  private jet-related tax breaks come from, anyway?  Clue: The answer may  involve an infamous bill that zero House Republicans supported, and  that Barack Obama signed into law.

The vaulted STIMULUS!

The Liberal giveth, and The Liberal wants to take it away when it benefits them politically. Now doesn’t that feel you with confidence?

Oh, and the tax break will bring in $3 Billion dollars over 10 years. OOOH! That’ll fix a $14,400,000,000,000 budget deficit!

Damn those evil greedy rich people!!

IT’S ALL THEIR FAULT!! 🙂

One Republican Senate aide, however, shot back in an email to The Daily Caller, saying that the White House only recently sent over the agreements for Congress’ approval. The aide also said that when it comes to tax breaks for corporate jets, “Who would really bear the brunt — wealthy corporate jet owners or the workers who build the jets?”

On the president’s call to put construction workers back to work, presumably through government-sponsored projects, the aide said, “He [Obama] said the same thing before the stimulus and it turned out to be a complete hoax. Only a tiny portion of the stimulus went to infrastructure … Also, we simply can’t afford it and the stimulus has proven we can’t spend our way to prosperity.”

But that’s the sacred cow of the Left though so that doesn’t exist. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Extreme!

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

The President in Pennsylvania, the state, instead of Pennsylvania Ave being a leader:  “If you’re complaining about the price of gas and you’re only getting 8 miles a gallon, you know,” Obama said laughingly. “You might want to think about a trade-in.”

There’s that liberal “compassion” and “sensitivity”. 🙂

So if you are struggling with inflation in gas prices, food prices and utility costs the best thing you can for yourself is to get a new car that will cost you even more money!!

So what if you can’t afford it!

But you’ll get better mileage. 🙂

Sounds like an Obama plan. When you are struggling economically, spend even more!! 😦

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/04/07/krauthammer_obamas_energy_plan_is_drill_in_brazil_and_windmills.html

Before Paul Ryan’s 2012 budget released yesterday, the Liberal Establishment was telling us that what was needed was an adult conversation on the budget and entitlements. Now that they have got their adult conversation, they can’t handle it.

Evidenced by one of our favourite radical leftists and now head of the DNC (while still a Congressman):

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) comments on Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget proposal for FY 2012.

“Representing a large number of seniors in south Florida, I can tell you that this budget would be devastating for seniors and older Americans. This Republican path to poverty passes like a tornado through America’s nursing homes, where millions of America’s seniors receive long-term and end of life care,” Rep. Wasserman Schultz said.

And good “rich” Billionaire (because he’s a socialist): I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control otherwise they might get me into trouble. ‘I have always harboured an exaggerated view of my self-importance,’ he wrote. ‘To put it bluntly, I fancied myself as some kind of god or an economic reformer like Keynes, or, even better, like Einstein (“Alchemy of Finance”).-George Soros

“‘I’ve come to the conclusion,’ Soros told Fortune, ‘that one can do a lot more about the issues I care about by changing the government than by pushing the issues.’  In short, he has become the world’s angriest billionaire.”  (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03).

Sounds a bit like Obama. 🙂

A fundraising appeal from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee warns supporters that “Tea Party Republicans are threatening to shut down the government on Friday unless we surrender to their outrageous demands.”

The fundraising email, penned by DCCC Chairman Steve Israel (N.Y.), went out late Wednesday and asks for small donations to the committee’s “GOP Accountability Fund,” setting a goal of raising $50,000 by Friday “so we can hold Speaker Boehner and his Tea Party fringe Republicans immediately accountable for shutting down the government.”

“The world is watching our next move,” Israel wrote. “Will we cave to the Tea Party’s disgraceful act of political extortion or will we fight back with the full force of our grassroots strength?”

Never let a Crisis go to waste!! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

“What if the president and your representative saw it coming and could have prevented it from happening?” Ryan said. “What would you think of them if they didn’t?” A hush came over the audience at the American Enterprise Institute. It was Ryan’s way of saying that the financial meltdown arrived largely without warning, while the impending fiscal crunch is like a runaway freight train. “This is the most predictable crisis in the history of our country,” he went on. “We are on our path to a debt crisis” like those we’ve seen recently in Europe, with the national debt as a percentage of gross domestic product rising, under Barack Obama’s budget, past the 90 percent danger point on its way to 800 percent. (townhall.com)

So if it’s that predictable, even the Democrats would drop their partisanship and do what is best for the nation and it’s people….

Yes, that was cynical chuckle moment.

The Democrats have only 3 plays in their playbook and variations on it.

1. Class Warfare  2. Fear  3. Intimidation

That’s it.

And if you disagree with them at any level you are an “extremist” !!!!

Ryan’s budget is based on the idea that people are capable of making decisions for themselves.

EVIL!!!

1961: And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you  can do for your country.

2011: And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what you can do for the country; ask what the government can do for you.

Karl Rove: In the White House Press Room on Tuesday, President Barack Obama did what comes naturally—scold others, in this case the Congress. Mr. Obama complained that a budget agreement “could have gotten done three months ago.”

What he didn’t say was that the budget should have “gotten done” six months ago, before the current fiscal year started last Oct. 1. Our government’s failure to have a budget in place halfway through the fiscal year is the president’s responsibility. He and his party dominated Congress by wide margins when the budget was supposed to be put in place.

Also on Tuesday, at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan did what the president has not. Demonstrating leadership and more than a little courage, Mr. Ryan laid out a thoughtful, ambitious blueprint for the next decade.

The Path to Prosperity would return discretionary spending to its 2008 levels and hold it flat for five years; reduce the federal government’s work force by 10%; slash corporate welfare; reform the tax code; and reduce the corporate and top personal rate to 25%. It would repeal ObamaCare, change Medicare so the government helps all seniors pay for an insurance policy they choose, and send states money for each person covered by Medicaid, plus the flexibility to spend that money as they see fit.

The Obama-Ryan budget battle foreshadows what Americans are likely to hear in the 2012 campaign: an unengaged, reactive chief executive versus a bold, reform-minded GOP.

In the short term, it’s obvious what Mr. Obama hopes to gain. Having watched his standing as “a strong and decisive leader” drop to 52% in last month’s Gallup poll from 60% last year, the president is looking to profit politically from a shutdown of the federal government.

When the government was twice shut down in 1995 and 1996, Congressional Republicans survived the controversy and kept their majorities in the 1996 election. At the same time, the shutdowns boosted Bill Clinton’s image. Only 37% viewed him as “a strong leader” in a June 1995 ABC News poll. In a January 1996 CBS News poll after the shutdowns, 53% said Mr. Clinton had “strong qualities of leadership.”

The president will instruct his party to demagogue the House Republican budget, labeling it as an assault on the poor and a windfall for the rich that will rip America’s social safety net to shreds.

Never mind that these charges are false and irresponsible. Mr. Ryan would have the government spend $40 trillion over the next 10 years, $6.2 trillion less than Mr. Obama’s budget plan of $46 trillion. This is an overall reduction in what the government plans to spend, not a cut from what it is spending today.

Under Mr. Ryan’s proposal, for example, health-care spending would still rise for both Medicaid, which serves the poor, and Medicare, which serves seniors. The $275 billion spent on Medicaid this year would grow to $305 billion in 2021 while the $563 billion spent on Medicare this year would grow to $953 billion in 2021. Nor would anyone 55 years or older be affected by any Medicare reforms.

Mr. Ryan and his colleagues want to act now to keep entitlement programs solvent. They want to keep Americans from experiencing the pain of the ­crisis that will come when the public debt has doubled by 2012 (from the level when Mr. Obama came into office) and nearly ­tripled by 2021, as it would under the president’s plan. Already mandatory spending, the part of the budget that’s automatic and not subject to approval each year by Congress, eats up all available revenue this year. Medicare goes broke in 2029, and Social Security is bankrupt in 2037.

The White House doesn’t care—it perceives a political path to victory in 2012. What makes this strategy doubly reckless and cynical is that the administration knows a debt crisis is coming and that its spending plans cannot continue.

But the Obama administration’s adults—Chief of Staff Bill Daley, Office of Management and Budget Director Jack Lew, and National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling—are clearly not in charge. The politicos—Senior Adviser David Plouffe (who managed Mr. Obama’s 2008 campaign) and Communications Director Daniel Pfeiffer (who had the same title in the 2008 campaign) have their hands on the wheel. The White House is in full re-election mode.

The House GOP budget will not become law this year, but it will smoke the president out on spending and provide a framework for Republicans to discuss the nation’s fiscal challenges. The contrast between the GOP’s boldness and the president’s cowardice is striking. The question is whether the president and his party will pay a political price for their abdication of leadership. We’re about to find out.

But rest assured the Liberal Press will be there to ignore it entirely and will tirelessly cheerlead for the Liberal progressive cause.

I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function. (Gov. Huckabee 2009)

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

 

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

Carry me back to old Virginny

The Commonwealth of Virginia is obvious the next target for the Chicago Mob in the White House.

But will they go there? That is the question.

The Commonwealth has enacted an Illegal Immigration strategy that is very similar to Arizona, but with some key differences.

But they have also won Round 1 in the “Up Yours!” Obamacare fight. And they are just the first out of the gate.

The state of Virginia can continue its lawsuit to stop the nation’s new health care law from taking effect, a federal judge ruled Monday.

U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson said he is allowing the suit against the U.S. government to proceed, saying no court has ever ruled on whether it’s constitutional to require Americans to purchase a product.

“While this case raises a host of complex constitutional issues, all seem to distill to the single question of whether or not Congress has the power to regulate — and tax — a citizen’s decision not to participate in interstate commerce,” Hudson wrote in a 32-page decision.

“The congressional enactment under review — the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision — literally forges new ground and extends (the U.S. Constitution’s) Commerce Clause powers beyond its current high watermark,” Hudson said.

“Given the presence of some authority arguably supporting the theory underlying each side’s position, this court cannot conclude at this stage that the complaint fails to state a cause of action,” he wrote.

The decision is a small step, but in no way a minor matter to opponents of the health care bill rejected by all congressional Republicans but signed into law by President Obama earlier this year.
“This lawsuit is not about health care, it’s about our freedom and about standing up and calling on the federal government to follow the ultimate law of the land — the Constitution,” said Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who brought the suit. “The government cannot draft an unwilling citizen into commerce just so it can regulate him under the Commerce Clause.”

“Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has brought forward a specific and narrowly tailored objection to the Act. It warrants a full and thorough hearing in our courts. It is meritorious and constitutionally correct. … I look forward to the full hearing this fall,” said Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell.

Cuccinelli filed the suit almost immediately after the law was signed, arguing that it conflicts with Virginia’s legislation — also passed this year — exempting state residents from the requirement that all Americans be forced into health care coverage. Cuccinelli argued that the law violates the Constitution’s Commerce Clause.

The Commerce Clause allows the U.S. government to regulate economic activity. But Virginia argued that it’s not economic activity when someone chooses to refrain from participating in commerce.

The U.S. government, which was defending itself through the Health and Human Services Department run by Secretary Kathleen Sebelius argued that everyone will need medical services at some point in their life and therefore is either a “current or future participation in the health care market,” and therefore subject to taxation.

“We do not leave people to die at the emergency room door — whether they have insurance or not. Those costs — an estimated $43 billion annually — are absorbed by everyone else paying into the health care market including doctors, hospitals and insured patients. Congress has the authority under the Commerce Clause to address that cost-shifting burdening the interstate market for health care,” argues the brief filed by the Justice Department on behalf of HHS.

“Today’s ruling is merely a procedural decision by the court to allow this case to move forward. We believe there is clear and well-established legal precedent that Congress acted within its constitutional authority in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. We are confident that the health care reform statute is constitutional and that we will ultimately prevail,” the department said in a statement.

Supporters of the law say the decision Monday is merely procedural, but the law will be proven constitutional when it gets to a hearing on the content.

“This case is really a politically motivated ploy aimed at diverting attention from the many benefits of the new law,” said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, which lobbied in favor of the bill. “The decision today should not distract states and the federal government from focusing on implementing the new law in the most effective way possible. The benefits of the new law are just becoming apparent, and substantially more help is on the way.”

More than a dozen state attorneys general have filed a lawsuit in Florida challenging the federal law, but Virginia’s is the first to reach a courtroom. (FOX)

Missouri voters are expected to pass a measure on Tuesday to forbid the federal government from penalizing individuals for refusing to buy health insurance. But it could be symbolic because federal law typically supersedes state laws.

The federal penalty provision does not take effect until 2014 and the Obama administration has pointed to tax credits, subsidies and other mechanisms to help those who cannot afford to buy insurance. Some 46 million people in the United States lack healthcare coverage.

The Obama administration has countered that the government always has the ability to levy taxes and that the Constitution places the federal government’s powers over the states.

Shut up and sit down, we have supreme executive power and can do anything we want! 🙂

Never before has Congress sought to use its powers under the Commerce Clause to force a private citizen to buy a good or service from another private person or entity.  If Congress can do that in the name of ensuring that everyone has health insurance, what is to stop it from ordering citizens to buy a particular brand of car to ensure that everyone has a car to drive?  The possibilities, and hence the power claimed, are virtually limitless.– Virgina AG Cucchinelli

Naturally, the Ministry of Truth and the Liberals are playing it down as no big deal. Just a “procedural” victory they all say in unison. It’s no big deal.

But the “procedural” partial victory they got in the Arizona case was a full-on party-hardy yippee! victory against the evil racists!

Fascinating… 🙂

The media’s bias and ideology shines through again!

Meanwhile, It’s Mayberry to the Rescue!

The latest ObamaCare ad, curiously out at the same time as this decision, 🙂 has Andy Griffith touting the greatness of Medicare and now ObamaCare and how it’s going to take care of Seniors.

I saw they ad, it thought it was very self-centered, arrogant, and greedy. Which means it’s perfect for Obama.

Factcheck.org:

Would the sheriff of Mayberry mislead you about Medicare? Alas, yes.

In a new TV spot from the Obama administration, actor Andy Griffith, famous for his 1960s portrayal of the top law enforcement official in the fictional town of Mayberry, N.C., touts benefits of the new health care law. Griffith tells his fellow senior citizens, “like always, we’ll have our guaranteed [Medicare] benefits.” But the truth is that the new law is guaranteed to result in benefit cuts for one class of Medicare beneficiaries — those in private Medicare Advantage plans.

The White House released the ad on the 45th anniversary of the Medicare program, and said it would run nationally on cable TV networks. Griffith, whose “Andy Griffith Show” was a TV comedy hit at the time Medicare was first enacted in 1965, explains the “good things” that the new health care law will mean for Medicare beneficiaries.

“This year, like always, we’ll have our guaranteed benefits,” he says. An announcement of the ad on the White House website reinforces that claim, saying: “Under the Affordable Care Act … Seniors guaranteed Medicare benefits will remain the same.” But the truth is, for millions of seniors, benefits won’t remain the same.

As we wrote most recently last December, about 10 million Medicare Advantage recipients could see their extra benefits reduced by an average of $43 per month, according to the Congressional Budget Office. And more recently, a detailed analysis by the Medicare program’s own chief actuary, Richard Foster, stated in April:

Medicare Actuary Richard Foster: The new provisions will generally reduce MA rebates to plans and thereby result in less generous benefit packages. We estimate that in 2017, when the MA provisions will be fully phased in, enrollment in MA plans will be lower by about 50 percent (from its projected level of 14.8 million under the prior law to 7.4 million under the new law).

Even the head of the White House Office of Health Reform, Nancy-Ann DeParle, acknowledges that Medicare Advantage benefits are going to be reduced. “I’m sure that some of those additional benefits have been nice,” the Wall Street Journal quoted her as saying in a July 25 report. “But I think what we have to look at here is what’s fair and what’s important for the strength of the Medicare program long term.”

A Weasel Word

So how can the Obama administration claim that “guaranteed Medicare benefits will remain the same”? The answer is that the term “guaranteed” is a weasel word — a qualifier that sucks the meaning out of a phrase in the way that weasels supposedly suck the contents out of an egg. It may sound to the casual listener as though this ad is saying that the benefits of all Medicare recipients are guaranteed to stay the same — and that may well be the way the ad’s sponsors wish listeners to hear it. But what the administration is really saying is that only those benefits that are guaranteed in law will remain the same.

There’s even a section in the new law (section 3601) that says: “Nothing in the provisions of, or amendments made by, this Act shall result in a reduction of guaranteed benefits under title XVIII of the Social Security Act” (the title that establishes the Medicare program). Section 3602 says even Medicare Advantage recipients won’t suffer any reduction of “any benefits guaranteed by law.”

But here’s the catch: The extra benefits generally offered by Medicare Advantage plans aren’t guaranteed by law. They are offered by private insurance companies as inducements. The companies have been able to offer somewhat more generous packages than traditional, fee-for-service Medicare because the system pays them as much as 40 percent more per patient than it pays for traditional Medicare, according to the chief actuary. The average in 2009 was about 14 percent more, according to the most recent analysis by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation, issued in February. But the new law generally eliminates the extra payments in the coming years. Foster, the chief actuary, estimates that federal spending for Medicare Advantage will be reduced by $145 billion over the law’s first decade.

Currently, about 1 in every 4 Medicare beneficiary is enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan. For many of them, the words in this ad ring hollow, and the promise that “benefits will remain the same” is just as fictional as the town of Mayberry was when Griffith played the local sheriff.

But Barney Fife wrote the Law and now expects you believe them when they say, it’s for your own good. 🙂

The The American Spectator and American’s For Tax Reform:

The Spectator blog reports on a conference call held this morning by HHS Secretary Sebelius to promote a new report regarding the health law’s impact on Medicare.  Questioned about claims by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ chief actuary that the Medicare reductions in the law “cannot be simultaneously used to finance other federal outlays and to extend the [Medicare] trust fund” solvency, Secretary Sebelius replied that

There are two different operating methods of looking at this, and the CMS actuary in the report that you cite differs in his strategic opinion from every accounting methodology that’s used for every other program in the federal budget, that has traditionally used for Medicare.  And he has a different interpretation that is not agreed upon by either the Congressional Budget Office or the OMB or traditionally in Congress.

Unfortunately for the Secretary, however, the Congressional Budget Office has on numerous occasions confirmed that any claims the law will improve Medicare’s solvency revolve around notional double-counting under federal budgetary conventions.  A January CBO letter found that “the majority of the [Medicare] trust fund savings…would be used to pay for other spending and therefore would not enhance the ability of the government to pay for future Medicare benefits.”  And in a March letter, CBO quantified the amount of that double-counting, estimating that, if the law’s Medicare savings were actually set aside to improve the solvency of the Medicare trust fund (as opposed to being used for other spending), the bill would increase the deficit by $260 billion over its first ten years alone.

In other words, the CBO agrees with the CMS actuary that the same money the same money can’t be used twice – once to expand coverage, and a second time to extend the life of the Medicare trust fund.  The Secretary’s statement that “there are two different operating methods of looking at this,” and that CBO disagrees with the Administration’s own actuaries on the impact of this budgetary double-counting, is demonstrably FALSE.

But don’t worry, the Ministry of Truth is right on top of it. 🙂

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/08/03/pkg.tuchman.sanctuary.city.cnn?hpt=C2

President Obama described officials who “demagogue” immigration or take sudden “anti-immigrant” stances as people who want to make a name for themselves and not help solve what he called “a national problem.” (CBS)

But his demagoguery is not worth mentioning. 🙂

“I understand the frustration of people in Arizona,” Mr. Obama said. “But what we can’t do is demagogue the issue, and what we can’t do is allow a patchwork of 50 different states, or cities or localities, where anybody who wants to make a name for themselves suddenly says, ‘I’m going to be anti-immigrant, and I’m going try to see if I can solve the problem ourself.’ This is a national problem.”– on CBS “Early Show”

But I end on a Vote of No Confidence  on ICE Director John Morton, from his own people.

http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/view_online.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fkfyi.com%2Fcc-common%2Fmlib%2F622%2F08%2F622_1280843100.pdf

or http://kfyi.com/pages/jimsharpe.html

But don’t it’s all for your own good. We are the Washington Elites, we are just better than you unwashed peasant masses.

And now the New York City government elites says it’s ok for there to be a 13-story Islamic Mosque 600 yards from Ground Zero built by a guy who believes in Shiria Law in America.

Doesn’t that just make you feel safer about the government. 🙂