News for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. All content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this site - no paid ads accepted - no payments for articles.Fair Use doctrine is posted & used. Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Follow @arra Contact: email@example.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home Page
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
Saturday, April 03, 2010
The Fate of the Republican Party
By Steve McGregor, The American Thinker: The Republican Party is a minority, a supposedly insignificant force. Abhorrent legislation seems destined to remain law. The country is riven by disagreement over our basic civil rights. The Democratic Party labels us an "opposition party" or "the party of no." I'm talking about 1854.
The similarity to the present day doesn't end there. That year, Democrats used their own form of parliamentary chicanery to pass the Kansas-Nebraska Act in order to expand slavery to new states. As Bill Bennett writes in volume one of his American history text, "Democrats argued that the 'sacred principle' of democracy was that the people of any territory could decide whether or not to permit slavery." Ironically, this was known as "popular sovereignty." It was a bizarre attempt to claim an interest in civil rights while trampling the rights of others. And there was no one to oppose this bill.
That is, until a new alliance formed in Ripon, Wisconsin stood up and said, "No." They called themselves Republicans.
But they were still a minority, fractured by competing interests and relatively leaderless. Then several things changed. First, the American electorate had a say in the matter, voting 73 of 157 Democrats out of the House of Representatives. They also elected 43 Republicans from scratch, providing a base. Second, the newly-elected Republicans stood firm. Instead of compromising with Democrats, they committed themselves to the idea that all men are created equal. Nowhere is this resolve better-expressed than in the man who emerged as the Republican leader: Abraham Lincoln. But it was six years before Lincoln ascended to the presidency, and he earned his election through public debate with the former sponsor of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Senator Stephen Douglas.
Given this proud history, I cannot understand some of the recent Republican gripes. One commenter argues that we should forsake the "Republican" moniker because another noun is more popular. She quotes one poll of adults where 24% identify as "Republican" versus 40% as "conservative." This is a bit like trying to convince Catholics to change to "Christians" to increase church attendance. Yet political parties, like religions, are more than just a brand. And have we become so arrogant that we assume a name change would suffice to achieve popularity? The American people are self-professed conservatives not because of the word itself, but because of their values.
Or take another complaint that Republicans never attempted to reach a deal. We decided that there would be "No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles...and ended with none." Exactly right! We did not compromise like Representative Stupak or engage in backroom deals with unions or accept bribes like the Louisiana Purchase or lie to the American people like President Obama.
Already voters are responding. Public approval for Congress is in the tank. Politicians must have noticed too, because 34 Democrats voted with Republicans on ObamaCare. This is not the time to back down or reconfigure.
Maintaining ongoing opposition to ObamaCare is a tough challenge -- but no tougher than our fight against the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Now, just as then, Republicans are uncertain about the future of our families, our party, and our country. As President Lincoln said, "The cause of civil liberty must not be surrendered at the end of one, or even one hundred, defeats." To succeed, we must raise voter turnout, refuse to compromise our principles, support emerging leaders, and engage in public debate.
"Life and liberty since 1854." That sounds like a clarion call to me.
------------------- Steve McGregor writes for the American Thinker and others. He is Special Adviser on defense issues to a peer in the British House of Lords and a post-graduate student in Social Anthropology at University College London. Previously he served as a captain in the Rakkasans. Read more atSteveMcGregor.org. Tags:Steve McGregor, The American Thinker, Republican Party, history, life, liberty To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Plans Under Way Which May Trample On Posse Comitatus
Dr. Bill Smith, Editor: Over a year ago (in 2008), in an article titled: "Is The Death of Posse Comitatus at Hand?", I expressed my concern over the possibility that the doctrine of Posse Comitatus coming to an end. If you do not understand either the doctrine or the history of abuses regarding Posse Comitatus, please take time to read the article.
Three months later, I posted the following article: "Military Notices Initial Public Reactions to Use of Troops in America" and stated, "[T]he present public appears focused on the potential actions of a new administration and the current potential economic crisis. They may still not be fully aware of the treat of our bothers and sisters in the military being requested and / or forced to threaten individual freedom and rights of American citizens."
Well folks, a year and a half later, the situation appears to be getting graver. The following article is presented without edits (but with highlights) to provide you the opportunity to balance today's actions and concern by members of law enforcement with past warnings. by Jim Kouri, The Examiner - "Political Correctness seeps deeper into the US military, law enforcement": When the Obama administration announced that enemy combatants and terrorists will be given Miranda Warnings when they are captured, many Americans wondered how that would improve our war fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq or other terrorist havens. However, upon examining the directive by President Barack Obama, perhaps there is an ulterior motive for his directive. Blurring the lines between law enforcement and the military appears to be the goal sought by Obama and the progressives. More federal control of local law enforcement while at the same time cross-training soldiers to perform the police function within the U.S.
In a recent report released to the US Congress, analysts assessed what they termed “preparedness tests” between the U.S. military and government agencies at the federal, state and local levels. U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) exercises to test preparedness to perform its homeland defense and civil support missions. The Government Accountability Office was asked to assess the extent to which NORTHCOM is consistent with Department of Defense guidelines for training and exercise requirement involving interagency partners and states in its exercises.
NORTHCOM’s exercise program is generally consistent with the requirements of DOD’s Joint Training System, but its exercise reporting is inconsistent. Since the command was established in 2002, NORTHCOM has conducted 13 large-scale exercises and generally completed exercise summary reports within the required time frame. However, those reports did not consistently include certain information, such as areas needing improvement, because NORTHCOM lacks guidance that specifies exercise reports’ content and format, potentially impacting its ability to meet internal standards for planning and execution of joint exercises, and to compare and share exercise results over time with interagency partners and states.
“While the rationale for using the US military domestically had been debated for years, President Barack Obama appears intent on using our military at least until he can create his promised 'Civilian Security Force' which he said would be as big and powerful as the military,” said political strategist Mike Baker. “The fact that the military — in this instance NORTHCOM — is being trained to operate within our borders should be setting off alarms throughout this nation. But it’s being ignored even by those who profess to be conservatives,” he said.
Nineteen federal agencies and organizations and 17 states and the District of Columbia have participated in one or more of the seven large-scale exercises that NORTHCOM has conducted since September 2005. However, NORTHCOM faces challenges in involving states in the planning, conduct, and assessment of its exercises, such as adapting its exercise system and practices to involve other federal, state, local, and tribal agencies that do not have the same practices or level of planning resources.
Inconsistencies with how NORTHCOM involves states in exercises are occurring in part because NORTHCOM officials lack experience dealing with states and do not have a consistent process for including states in exercises. Without such a process, NORTHCOM increases the risk that its exercises will not provide benefits for all participants, impact the seamless exercise of all levels of government, and potentially affect NORTHCOM’s ability to provide civil support capabilities.
"It is up to the residents of individual states to tell their governors they do not want the federal government intruding on law enforcement and public safety issues," said former NYPD detective and Marine intelligence officer Sid Frances. "This is especially true if their governors share the same political philosophy as the President and his minions in Washington," he added.
NORTHCOM has a systematic lessons learned and corrective action program to improve preparedness, but gaps remain with collecting and sharing lessons with agency and state partners and managing corrective actions. Access to the system NORTHCOM uses for managing exercise observations is limited for non-DOD participants, and DOD believes that the Homeland Security Department's system is not adequately protected from unauthorized users. NORTHCOM’s mitigation steps have not resolved the issues. In addition, about 20 percent of the corrective actions tracked by NORTHCOM were being closed prematurely due to gaps in oversight. Closing issues prematurely increases the risk that issues will reoccur and limits the knowledge gained and value of the exercise.
The Government Accountability Office is making recommendations to DOD to direct NORTHCOM to consistently involve the states in planning, executing, and assessing exercises and improve oversight of corrective actions. The GAO is also recommending that DOD define when NORTHCOM should use planning and documentation requirements. DOD agreed or partially agreed with the recommendations and cited ongoing and future efforts to satisfy the recommendations’ intent. DOD did not fully address a recommendation on training to NORTHCOM staff on specific state emergency management structures. GAO believes such training would benefit NORTHCOM personnel in advance of a crisis and for exercise planning.
The first active-duty unit dedicated to supporting US civilian authorities in the event of a nuclear, biological or chemical attack is wrapping up three days of intensive training in tactics to be used within the continental United States, according to Armed Forces Press Service representative Donna Miles. Ms. Miles reported to news reporters, bloggers and Internet journalists that troops from the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team are at the Naval facility located in Indian Head, Maryland getting hands-on training in skills they would depend on to provide support during a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive incident, known here as a CBRNE.
However, not everyone is happy about this latest military development coming so close to the transition from the Bush White House to the Obama Administration. Some observers believe this plan is part of a deal between President Obama and the current Secretary of Defense who remained in his current position even after the Bush-Obama transition.
“While Obama and his team are making it sound as if they will use the military in a non-combative roll, part of the training being conducted is in urban warfare,” claims Mike Baker. “Obama appears oblivious to Posse Comitatus and to the US Constitution when it comes to using the military against civilians within US borders,” he added.
While the military experts in Obama's pocket appear excited about this use of soldiers within the borders of the United States, many military and police commanders and officers are less enthusiastic."I cannot understand why the federal government is so intent on using such military force within our borders. It reminds me of the Branch Davidian massacre in Waco, Texas when the feds used excessive deadly force against men, women and children. And they used that deadly physical force based on false information," warns former Det. Frances.
"While I've served in the military and continue as a reservist, as a [New Jersey] cop I'm troubled about the use of federal troops coming into our communities during any emergencies," said Detective Lieutenant Stephan Rodgers
--------------- Jim Kouri is ca vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and a columnist for The Examiner and New Media Alliance. He blogs for the Cheyenne Fox News Radio affiliate KGAB and serves as political adviser for actor Michael Moriarty. He's served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He's a news writer and columnist for numerous online news services and appears regularly as on-air commentator for over 100 TV, radio news and network and cable talk shows.Tags:Posse Comitatus, military, Unites States, DOD, local law enforcement, military force in United States, NorthCom, police, police state, President, US Government To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Arkansas Democrat Leadership Does Not Understand the U.S. Constitution - A Lesson in Arkansas History
This week, State Senator and Republican Candidate for Governor Jim Keet expressed his disappointment with Governor Beebe regarding his recent comments comparing criticism surrounding President Obama’s health care bill to the 1957 Little Rock School crisis.
Keet said, “When I first heard Governor Beebe’s televised remarks comparing Arkansans’ legitimate concerns surrounding the health care bill to the 1957 Little Rock School crisis, I was disappointed.” “I then read his comments in the Washington Post. They dredged up memories of an embarrassing part of our history. As Arkansans we are saddened to be the subject of a derogatory article in a newspaper which is read worldwide. Is this how the Governor wants our state to be portrayed?”
Keet continued, “The legal issue arising from Obamacare is not settled law as was the case in 1957 when Orval E. Faubus whipped up a hateful frenzy in outright defiance of President Eisenhower’s order enforcing the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education.”
“For the first time the federal government is directing American citizens to buy a specific product, health care insurance, and if they don’t, they will be fined. It was disingenuous and beneath the Governor to say, ‘they tried it here in Arkansas in 1957 and it didn’t work,’” Keet commented. “Why hurt Arkansas by saying things that the Washington Post could, and did, twist into an innuendo of racism.”
“Attached is a lesson in Arkansas history that Governor Beebe might want to consider. I am no attorney and have never been the Attorney General, but I am a student of history. It seems to me that Governor Beebe should know the difference between a case that was settled by the Supreme Court and a law which has never been tested in the courts. Georgetown University Professor Jonathan Turley, along with other legal experts, believes the lawsuit, which has now been joined by 14 states, has merit. It is unfortunate that our Governor has decided to accept this far reaching law without questioning its constitutionality. And in the process, he has defamed our state in the Washington Post.”
------------- Lesson in Arkansas History by Jim Keet: Many Arkansans are disappointed that Governor Beebe did not reveal his position on Obamacare until after the bill was passed by congress. Even more people are upset at his refusal to join the governors and attorneys general of other states who are suing to test the constitutionality of the law. Obamacare will cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars. A significant majority of our people believe it will add to our enormous national debt and diminish the high quality of health care that Arkansans now enjoy.
In answer to those who want to test Obamacare in court, the governor says Arkansas must cave in to whatever the federal government decides to do. His exact quote was: “the truth is the federal government can’t just be defied by the state governments.” To support his position and divert attention, he dredged up the Little Rock High School integration crisis, the ghost of Orval E. Faubus, and a multitude of bad memories from 1957. Politicians often use a red herring, but Beebe’s ploy subjected Arkansas to a fresh, unnecessary round of embarrassment. His comments about a dark moment in our state were spread far and wide by the ever-eager Washington Post.
The legal issue arising from Obamacare is not settled law as was the case in 1957 when Faubus whipped up a hateful frenzy in outright defiance of President Eisenhower’s order enforcing the U. S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education. The court, in Brown, overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, the indefensible “separate but equal” doctrine that created an excuse to segregate the races in public schools. The state of Arkansas did not have a leg to stand on, morally or legally. Unlike 1957, there is no settled precident that controls the issues presented by controls of the healthcare bill.
Obamacare will face constitutional challenges brought by Florida, South Carolina, Idaho, Texas and several other states. The state of Virginia, with wide bi-partisan support, enacted a special law for the express purpose of challenging the Obamacare mandates in court. These are sincere and legitimate efforts to test the elasticity of the Commerce Clause of the U. S. Constitution.
For the first time the federal government is directing American citizens to buy a specific product, health care insurance, and if they don’t, they will be fined. It is one thing to regulate commerce; the intended purpose of the Commerce Clause. It is quite another to force citizens to engage in a specific act of commerce against their will. The court has never gone that far. Where the Commerce Clause ends and the 10th Amendment begins, is a question that has not been settled. The legal actions, peacefully brought by the states to test that proposition stand in stark contrast to the kind of defiance we saw on Park Street in Little Rock in 1957.
Additionally, Obamacare is extremely controversial. It was jammed through congress on a party line vote using questionable procedures, bribes, and backroom deals. It will touch virtually every American in one way or another.
Governor Beebe may call the suits acts of “defiance” but most Arkansans think it is a pretty good idea to see whether the constitution is being violated. It was disingenuous and beneath the governor to say: “They tried it here in Arkansas in 1957 and it didn’t work.” Why hurt Arkansas by saying things that the Washington Post could and did twist into an innuendo of racism? Claims of racism are a mainstay of the national Democrats, but Arkansas deserves better than that from Governor Beebe, particularly on something as sensitive as the Little Rock High School integration crisis.
I will cut him a little slack. He was only 11 years old in l957, but he is a Democrat. I hope these factors account for his skewed recollection of Arkansas history, but that does not dispense with the need to straighten out what he caused to be published in the Washington Post on March 30th.
For the record: Governor Orval E. Faubus was a Democrat. The entire Arkansas congressional delegation signed the “Southern Manifesto” declaring that the Supreme Court abused its power by overruling Plessy v. Ferguson. They were all Democrats. It should also be noted that President Eisenhower was a Republican and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have happened without the support of Republicans in congress. Southern Democrats fought it all the way. A lone congressman, Brooks Hays of Arkansas, tried to bring the sides together. He won his Democrat primary but was thrown out of office by a write-in candidate.
In 1964, Winthrop Rockefeller, a Republican, began a political effort to oust Orval E. Faubus and rid Arkansas of bigoted, machine politics. He became the 37th governor of Arkansas and opened up government and politics to women and African Americans. It was Governor Rockefeller’s victory that opened the door for a new generation of Democrats like Dale Bumpers, David Pryor, and Bill Clinton.
So, Governor Beebe, as we finish this lesson let me pose a history question. You were first eligible to vote in 1968 when you were a student at Arkansas State. Were you for Governor Rockefeller or were you for Marion Crank, the hand-picked heir to the Faubus machine?
--------- Jim Keet is a businessman, former State Senator and current candidate for Governor of Arkansas. Tags:Jim Keet, Mike Beebe, Arkansas, Obamacare, US Constitution, government health care, governor, States rights, Arkansas history, Democrats To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The Purpose of the Passion can be summed up as -- a second chance! The life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ provides a second chance for mankind to walk in relationship with the God who created them. The Scriptures make clear that through Adam sin entered the world, but through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ there is justification for every man, woman, boy and girl--if they only place their trust in Him.
The passion of Christ provides a second chance for each of us to be right with God by being forgiven of everything and anything we have ever done. The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ gives you and me the ability to live life to its fullest because we can be free of guilt and be guided by a purpose that eclipses all that the world has to offer.
Mel Gibson, in his movie The Passion, captures both the need and the power of the second chance available to us through Christ. Jesus is praying in Gethsemane when the guards of the high priest arrive to arrest Him. The guards approach and ask for Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus identifies Himself and Judas comes up to Him and kisses Him, saying "Hail, Rabbi." Jesus asks Judas why he is betraying "the Son of Man with a kiss?" Judas is stunned and steps back.
The guards move in to arrest Jesus. Suddenly, Peter explodes into action, attacking the guards. Ultimately, Peter pulls out a sword and cuts off the ear of one of the guards. Peter is eventually subdued, and Jesus tells him to drop his sword, saying, "Those who live by the sword die by the sword." Then Jesus reaches down, picks up the guard's severed ear, and looking into the guard's eyes, heals him.
Jesus stands up, and the remaining guards move in and arrest Him -- striking Him and handling Him roughly. They shove Him along the road and begin to leave. The healed guard is still on his knees, unmoving. His fellow guards tell him to get up and come along, but he cannot. The guard can no longer participate in anything that brings harm to the Christ.
He was left in the garden of Gethsemane to marvel at what the Savior had done for him. In the film, Peter, left behind, then comes face to face with the guard after Jesus healed his ear and touched his life. This is especially poignant, as within hours Peter would need that same forgiving touch of Jesus and a second chance.
This is the same Peter who had walked with Jesus (Matt 4:18-20). This is the same Peter who boldly declared that Jesus was the Son of God (Matt 16:13-17). This was the same Peter who committed to follow Jesus to the death (Matt 26:35). Despite all of this, Peter denied even knowing Jesus, not once, but three times (Matt 26:75). Was this the end for Peter? Was Peter beyond the forgiveness of Jesus Christ? Not at all! Following the resurrection, Jesus gave Peter a second chance (John 21:15-17).
The Purpose of the Passion is to give each of us a second chance. Whether you're like the guard who came face to face with Jesus for the first time or whether you're like Peter who had walked with Jesus in the past, declared who He is to others and even committed his life to Him, if something is separating you from the abundant life Jesus has obtained for you--a second chance awaits you. That's the Purpose of the Passion.
Tags:Good Friday, The Passion, Jesus Christ, Family Research Council, Christians To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Mount Dora, Florida Doctor Has Had Enough With ObamaCare
Dr. Jack Cassell, a Mount Dora, FL urologist is quite upset with Obamacare and its projected affect on his practice. He is exercising his free speech and has posted a sign on his office door warning supporters of President Barack Obama to find a different doctor. No, he is not rejected any patients but if they opt to leave that is fine with him. He still serves all patients regardless of political beliefs.
The sign on Dr. Jack's office reads, "If you voted for Obama, seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."
Cassell also proudly displays Republican reading material addressing health care in the waiting room. He even displays a signs with the material that reads, "This is what the morons in Washington have done to your health care. Take one, read it and vote out anyone who voted for it." Tags:Mount Dora, Florida, Jack Castell, Uroligist, Obamacare, Republican To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please Hat Tip the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Bobby Eberle, GOPUSA: One of the most interesting exchanges during the year-long "debate" on health care, and I use the word "debate" loosely, was an exchange between Barack Obama and John McCain at one of Obama's so-called "bi-partisanship" meetings. As McCain was noting some facts about health care, Obama butted in, and with complete lack of protocol, respect, and class addressed the senator as "John" and said that the "election was over."
It was such a bogus statement when he said it, and it is even more ridiculous now. The bill has been signed. The Democrats rammed it through despite a majority of Americans being opposed to it. And now what does Obama do? He steps up the campaign rhetoric by continuing his assault on those who are opposed to more debt, more regulation, and less control over our health care. The campaign for McCain may be over, but Obama's has never ended. . . .
Obama talks about the need to stop campaigning... that the election is over. But how does Obama react once he has signed the bill? He continues to not only campaign, but also mock those who are opposed to it.
Obama may joke that the world didn't end or the entire country collapse at the moment he signed the bill, but make no mistake about it... once that bill was signed, you and I lost more of our freedom. Our nation went into even more debt. And a chain reaction began that will "transform" the country just as Obama wanted it.
Doctor's will have more paperwork and get paid less. For all those out there who buy into the socialist mentality, you're probably thinking, "Good. They get paid too much." You probably won't be so happy as those doctors decide to do something else, leaving less choice for patients. More doctors are refusing to see Medicare patients. Now Medicare will be cut to pay for the government health insurance plan. Thus, doctors will get paid even less for seeing a Medicare patient. What do you think will happen? Less choice for elderly patients. Longer waits for elderly patients.
. . . Obama's campaign stop in Maine is only one of many where he will continue to preach the benefits of a health care bill the American people didn't support. In the speech, Obama said, "If they want to have a fight, I welcome that fight. Because I don't believe the American people are going to put the insurance industry back in the driver's seat." He was alluding to Republican opposition and the targeting of Democrats who voted for the ObamaCare plan.
The American people don't want government in the driver's seat! Obama jokes that the country didn't crumble instantly, but when he knowingly signs a bill that contains unconstitutional mandates and burdens Americans with more debt and taxes for generations, then he is causing the first cracks in the dam. Yes, it can be repaired, but will it be too late? Tags:Barack Obama, constant campaigning, health care, Bobby Eberle, GOPUSA, political cartoon, Michael Ramirez, unconstitutional mandates To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Arkansas Republicans Candidates Build Leads Over U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln
Rasmussen Reports: Four of Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln’s Republican opponents now earn more than 50% of the vote as her path to reelection grows even steeper. The numbers are closer when Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter is the Democrat in the race, but only because there are more undecided voters with respect to Halter.
Former State Senator Jim Holt 51% - Lincoln 35%
Congressman John Boozman 51% - Lincoln 36%
State Senate Republican leader Kim Hendren 51% Lincoln 36%
State Senator Gilbert Baker 51% Lincoln 36%
Businessman Curtis Coleman 48% to Lincolns 36%. In every case, the Republicans have gained support, while Lincoln, who earned 38% to 41% in the match-ups last month, has lost ground. Now her numbers are back to the lows she experienced in February.
Boozman [presently] runs strongest against Halter, leading him 48% to 34%. Holt posts a 43% to 34% over Halter; Hendren has 42% to 34% lead. Baker has 44% to 36% and Coleman’s 40% to Halter’s 37%.
[Rasmussen did not poll Conrad Reynolds and others GOP candidates against Lincoln or Halter.]
Other Issues: Repeal the Health Care Bill: 63% favor repeal; 33% are opposed to repeal. Who Understands America's Problems Better: TEA Party members or the Average member of Congress: 53% say the average Tea Party member; 26% say the average member of Congress. Obama’s Performance as President: Just 37% of voters approve; 61% disapprove. Tags:U.S Senate, Arkansas, Blanche Lincoln, John Boozman, Kim Hendren, Jim Holt, Gilbert Baker, Curtis Coleman To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
On Right-Wing "Hate": Don't Take the Democrat Bait
The following words of wisdom from a left coast conservative living in a liberal world. Stogie at SaberPoint in his article below makes an excellent point that needs to be shared with your friends, GOP, TEA Party and other activists.
---------- Answer a question for me. Will you agree to stop beating your wife? Yes or no. Why won't you answer? Well there you have it folks. Mr. Reader has REFUSED to stop beating his wife. YOU CUR! You LOWLIFE! Have you no SHAME?
Hey wait a minute! You might object to the question because it implies guilt on your part. No matter how you answer it, you are found guilty. It is a question designed to put you on the defensive, to make you sweat and look bad.
Democrat operatives know this trick well. Consider this.
MoveOn.Org, is planning a rally outside of Republican headquarters tomorrow to "condemn the hate." What hate? First off, no one has proven that there is any problem with Republican "hate" that requires a rally. MoveOn's rally is built on a false premise and they know it. The schemes and subterfuges of the Left are so transparent it is positively embarrassing. In the political arena, hate is prominent and vicious from the Left, but far more scarce and muted on the Right.
MoveOn.org's gambit is not to "condemn the hate," but to insinuate into the public mind that conservatives are dangerous crazies who are boiling with rage, ready to go postal at any minute. The falling popularity of Democrats and the success of the Tea Parties are not the result of widespread opposition to Obama's radical policies. No, they are the result of some baseless and inexplicable "hate."
When Democrat pundits and reporters ask GOP and Tea Party leaders to "condemn the hate," they are really asking for a tacit admission that the charge is true, that "hate" is a major problem on the Right. Conservatives cannot and should not give credence to the false charge. They must not become unwilling stooges in the Left's bogus drama.
If you are new to politics, this latest initiative by the Left should prove instructive. Politics are largely a mind-game and often the game gets dirty. Don't fall for it. Tags:Democrats, dirty tricks, MoveOn To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
No mandatory health care, trillions of new jobs, and low-emission unicorns. President Obama is the greatest president ever. NRSC:
Tags:Barack Obama, Health care, History, Law, Politics, president, President of the United States, United States, rainbows, unicorns, Democrats, NRSC, video To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author:Obama’s Scheduling Error - Yesterday, President Obama announced a major shift in U.S. energy policy by opening up large offshore areas for energy exploration. It was the “big story” of the day. But Obama’s announcement should have been made today, because, in spite of all the hype, his proposal amounts to an early April Fool’s joke on the American people.
Unfortunately for the president, his usual willing accomplices in the liberal media let the cat out of the bag. Consider this excerpt from the Los Angeles Times, “President Obama, after delaying and deliberating for a year, unveiled a controversial offshore drilling plan Wednesday that was driven largely by the politics of his agenda on energy and climate change -- not by hopes of changing the nation's energy supply. As a presidential candidate, Obama was attacked … for not supporting all-out expansion of offshore drilling. And one of his administration's first acts after he took office last year was to cancel the long-term offshore plans President George W. Bush had released at the end of his tenure.”
As we reported Friday, and as the Times report states, upon taking office the Obama Administration immediately slammed the brakes on offshore drilling and domestic exploration. Yesterday’s announcement isn’t progress at all. In fact, Obama canceled four planned leases in Alaska, put some areas of the Gulf of Mexico off limits, as well as the entire West Coast. After taking two steps back, Obama at best took one baby step forward.
But the worst part about the announcement is that Obama tied it to his political agenda, i.e., a cap and trade scheme and subsidies for “clean energy.” Cap and trade is a a great big tax that will lead to $7.00 a gallon gas. Why would anyone want to do that? As one analyst described it, this is the “Tanya Harding approach” to energy policy.
Obama and his liberal allies have to “break the kneecaps” of our current economy with tremendous taxes in order to make their Utopian “green” economy viable. For example, in 2008 the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported that subsidies for solar energy were $24.34 per megawatt-hour (MWh), while wind power was subsidized at $23.37 per MWh. In contrast, natural gas received 25 cents per MWh in subsidies, coal 44 cents, hydroelectricity 67 cents and nuclear power $1.59. Gary Bauer is is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families. He submitted this article in an email to the ARRA News Service Editor. Bauer was a former Republican presidential candidate and served as President Ronald Reagan’s domestic policy adviser. Tags:Gary Bauer, cap and trade, clean energy, William Warren, political cartoon, Barack Obama, oil drilling, offshore drilling, oil To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Rangel: The Most Un-Ethical Man In Congress - Likens ObamaCare Protesters To Anti-Civil Rights Racists
by Adam Bitely, NetRight Nation: Rep. Charles Rangel, the most enlightened and ethical man in the history of Congress, has claimed that the protesters who came to Washington, D.C. to protest ObamaCare are no different than those who protested against Civil Rights in the 1960's. Don't believe me? Watch the video:
According to Rangel, he has been spat on and cursed at. And today's protesters are just as evil as the Southern Racists of the past. I wonder if Rangel is referring to people like this:
by Dr. Chuck Baldwin: Yesterday, The Wall Street Journal carried a story entitled "Obama Steps Up Confrontation." It said in part, "On Thursday, the president challenged Republicans who planned to campaign on repealing his health-care bill with, 'Go for it.' Two days later, he made 15 senior appointments without Senate consent, including a union lawyer whose nomination had been blocked by a filibuster. . . At a bill-signing event Tuesday, he is set to laud passage of higher-education legislation that was approved despite Republican objections through a parliamentary maneuver that neutralized the party's filibuster threat."
Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) called Obama's decision to federalize most
student loans "really brazen" and "the most under reported, biggest Washington takeover in history." If history teaches us anything, it teaches us that power always craves more power. And there are only 2 ways to check power: internally, through self-discipline and humility; or externally, through equally determined and equipped counter-forces.
Americans should thank God that George Washington was our first President, because no one exemplified self-discipline and humility more than he did. After having led the colonies to perhaps the most miraculous revolution in world history, Washington was universally adored and even idolized. There were many that even attempted to make Washington America's king. He flatly refused this proposal, of course. (Compare Washington's character and humility to former President G.W. Bush, who, on this subject, said, "If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.")
The concept of an American monarch may seem foreign to us today, but remember that a monarchy was the only form of government the colonists had ever known. And there can be no doubt that a monarchy (or some form of it) has been the single most popular form of central government that the nations of the world have utilized. But remember, too, the theme of America's War for Independence was "No King But Jesus." And no one believed that more than General George Washington did.
Like most of America's founders, Washington distrusted government in general and despised big government in particular -- even though people were willing to make him government's imperial ruler. Listen to the Father of our country: "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
Unfortunately, there hasn't been a man of George Washington's caliber in the White House for many a moon. Instead of distrusting and limiting the central government, the vast majority of modern Presidents have completely ignored the constitutional role of the Presidency, and have sought to expand the authority of the executive branch of the federal government to proportions never allowed in the Constitution or envisioned by its creators. And Barack Obama is following the example of his predecessors by continuing this malevolent model (with increased rapidity, I might add). The above-mentioned stories are just the latest examples of what is fast becoming an imperial Presidency. It seems that every day another example of executive arrogance and usurpation of power takes place.
Given the lack of genuine humility and character of America's President -- and the unwillingness of Congress and the Supreme Court to restrain his unconstitutional propensities--it is left to the states and the People to hold this would-be king in check.
And here is another reason to be thankful for America's founders: they recognized the ultimate role of the states in safeguarding and protecting liberty. As James Madison said in Federalist 45, "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."
In Federalist 39 Madison said, "Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution." (Emphasis in the original.)
If America's founders desired that a national -- or monarchical -- government be established in the United States, what was the purpose of the original 13 colonies retaining individual statehood? Why would each State retain its authority as "a sovereign body," if not to serve as a vanguard against the encroachment upon liberty by the central government?
And never has liberty been more vulnerable to oppression and tyranny than right now! Why? Because ever since 9/11, both political parties in Washington, D.C., have placed America in a state of perpetual war. This fact alone puts the federal government in a position to become America's oppressor.
In the first place, the Congress of the United States (then controlled by Republicans) abdicated its constitutional obligation to be the sole determiner regarding America's entrance into war by providing then-President Bush with virtually unlimited and unchecked ability to determine and wage war clearly outside the perimeter of constitutional authority. And since taking over the federal government last year, Democrats in Washington, D.C., have followed suit.
But listen to Madison: "The executive [President] has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war."
Furthermore, the condition of unending, perpetual war only serves the purpose of lessening liberty. To quote Madison again: "No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare." Madison also declared, "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." And one more from Madison: "The means of defense against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home."
One needs to only look around to observe that Madison's warnings are quickly becoming a reality in these United States.
What all this means is that the American people cannot rely on Washington, D.C., to control itself. We cannot trust Washington politicians and bureaucrats to have the character and self-discipline to honor the Constitution and defend our liberties. If we are to preserve our freedom in this country, it will be up to the body politic in each State to do it. If the Congress and Court in Washington, D.C., will not rein in this burgeoning monarchy at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, then the states and People must.
At this point, I do not believe there is any way to avoid it: a showdown between freedom-loving states and the federal government is inevitable. But not only is it inevitable, it is absolutely necessary! The central government in Washington, D.C., is quickly morphing into a monarchy--or at the very least an oligarchy. And neither the Donkeys nor the Elephants inside the Beltway are willing to do anything to stop it. Either the states determine to defend the rights and liberties of the American people now, or we are destined to be governed by DC's despots. Furthermore, we cannot cede to the US Supreme Court -- or to any other federal authority -- our independence, and most certainly, those fundamental elements necessary to our very survival. Only the states and the People, respectively, can maintain these bulwarks.
The question is, Will my State raise the "Don't Tread On Me" flag and sincerely defend my liberties? And the follow-up question is, If my State will not do it, which states will, and what will I do? We have little choice. Either we join with a State that will fight for our liberties and help procure freedom for our posterity, or we follow radical unionists (and globalists) into a modern-day monarchy that is marching America toward oppression and servitude.
-------------- Dr. Chuck Baldwin is a Pastor of Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida and radio talk show host of “Chuck Baldwin Live” - a daily, one hour long call-in show in which Dr. Baldwin addresses current event topics from a conservative Christian point of view. Chuck Baldwin is a writer/columnist whose articles and political commentaries are carried by a host of Internet sites, newspapers, and news magazines. In 2008, Chuck was the Constitution Party Presidential Candidate. Tags:Chuck Baldwin, Imperial Presidency, freedom, Federalism, Republic, State's rights, U.S. Constitution, James Madison, George Washington, monarch, Barack Obama, Tyranny, Oppression To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Bill Wilson, Guest Editorial: Remember when President Obama vowed to "restore science to its rightful place?" His inaugural commitment, followed by executive orders, carried a message that methodologically sound science would trump politicized, ideological science.
It turns out, however, that the president's love affair with science isn't quite as clear-cut as it first seemed. Shortly after his inaugural pledge, Obama issued an Executive Order directing his chief science advisor to ensure that administration policies be based on sound science. The EO called for the appointment of science advisers on credentials rather than political leanings, and transparency about scientific decisions. “The public must be able to trust the science and scientific process informing public policy decisions,” he said. One year later, Obama has yet to earn a passing grade on his scientific integrity pledge.
For one thing, Obama simply has not acted, a point driven home by the nonprofit Union of Concerned Scientists, a left-wing advocacy group that normally supports the administration. They point out that Obama last year called for a science strategy to be developed within 120 days of his inauguration.
Yet the Office of Science and Technology Policy has still not finalized a plan, which leads to uneven application among federal agencies. Other shortcomings are apparent as well. Sunshine is indeed a disinfectant, allowing the public to identify ideologically-based “science” that has driven public policy decisions in the wrong direction.
But too many Freedom of Information Act requests for underlying scientific data used to formulate conclusions still languish too long in federal bureaucracies, effectively denying the public from being able to identify ideologically-driven “science.” Foot-dragging on transparency is one of Obama’s greatest failures. He still has not established guidelines for promoting open communication among scientists, the media, policymakers and the public. Nor has it set a process to release all scientific papers early in the policy process, before they might be altered by political appointees.
Another troublesome development involves the scientific advisory panels that are vital in agencies, especially the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For example, an FDA scientific advisory panel was directed by Congress last year to make recommendations on the impact of menthol in cigarettes. It’s a question for which sound scientific studies would seem to be needed.
Yet, according to one Wall Street analyst, some members of the administration-appointed panel have already come out for a menthol ban. And yet others have what appears to be a clear conflict of interest as they have worked for pharmaceutical firms that sell smoking cessation products. Given these viewpoints and conflicts, it’s questionable whether the public could trust their analysis. It’s a bit like having a Red Sox fan call balls and strikes at a Yankees baseball game
To “restore science to its proper place,” the Administration still must convince the public that it has washed ideologically biased science from government and that appointees to scientific positions throughout government are dedicated to methodologically sound science, not to a pre-determined agenda. It may be that the Obama administration never really had any intention of doing what it discussed with lofty rhetoric in its executive orders. If that is the case, substituting left-wing “science” under the ruse of “sound science” is no way to ensure that the public trusts the scientific process, and ultimately for the Obama Administration trust is the issue. ----------------- Mr.Bill Wilson is President of Americans for Limited Government. This article was submitted to the ARRA News Service Editor and also appears in the Washington Examiner Tags:President Obama, science, executive order, Obama, Administration, Bill Wilson, ALG, Americans for Limited Government To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
54%: Mason- Dixon Poll: “Miami Herald: Florida voters dislike the new healthcare law so much that President Barack Obama and the state's top Democrat, U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, are paying a hefty political price, according to a new survey and analysis by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research. Only 34% of Florida voters support the new law while 54 percent are against it, according to the poll. Opposition is significantly strong among two crucial blocs: those older than 65 and voters with no party affiliation. Seniors disfavor the bill by a 65-25% margin, while independents oppose the law 62 -34.” 3/27/2010
Today in Washington, D.C. - Mar 31, 2010 - GOP Advocates Repeal & Replace ObamaCare Which Evidences Major Cost Impacts On Employers
Congress still on recess but many members responding to the negative economic effects of the health care bill. Even more major employers are announcing millions of dollars in new costs this week thanks to Democrats’ job-killing health care bill, while small business owners fret that they’ll be next. Last week, we saw that Caterpillar and John Deere announced the new law will cost each around $100 million each in new taxes. AT&T announced it would cost the company $1 billion, AK Steel said the law will cost it $31 million, and 3M said it will cost that company $90 million. Yesterday, Prudential Financial announced that the health care bill will cost it $100 million and Illinois Tool Works said their company will see a $22 million cost.
Today, we learn that Boeing says "it will take a charge of $150 million due to the recent health care overhaul legislation. The aircraft maker, based in Chicago, says the charge will hurt earnings by 20 cents per share in the first quarter of 2010.” And we learn that aerospace and defense industry supplier “Goodrich Corp. says it expects to incur a one-time charge of $10 million, or 8 cents per diluted share, against its first-quarter results. The company cites the recently passed U.S. health-care reform legislation.”
Apparently appalled that their massive $2.6 trillion takeover of 1/6th of the economy is generating trouble for businesses and negatives headlines, Democrats have demanded explanations. The Wall Street Journal writes in an editorial today, “Democrats have responded to these writedowns not by rethinking their policy blunder but by hauling the CEOs before Congress on April 21 for an intimidation session. The letter demanding their attendance from House barons Henry Waxman and Bart Stupak declared that ‘The new law is designed to expand coverage and bring down costs, so your assertions are a matter of concern.’”
Meanwhile, small businesses are worried that the mandates and fines in the Democrats’ health care bill will fall on them as well. Already tanning salon owners and employees across the country are reeling from the new tax imposed on their businesses. But today, another AP story points out, “The national law doesn’t require businesses offer insurance but hits employers with 50 or more workers with an annual $2,000-per-employee fee if the company doesn’t insure them and the government ends up subsidizing their workers’ coverage. . . . For critics, one of the most troubling aspects of the laws is the fines. Massachusetts has already fined more than 1,000 companies over $18 million for failing to offer medical insurance to their workers. . . .
“Such penalties make Doug Newman, owner of Newman Concrete Services in Richmond, Maine, nervous. In the past 18 months, as the economy battered the construction industry, Newman’s work force shrunk from 125 employees to just 25. He is worried that once the economy turns and he begins to hire back workers, he’ll face a critical decision when he nears the 50-worker mark and is no longer exempt from penalties. Newman now pays 60 percent of his employees’ individual premiums and 40 percent of their family premiums. ‘The 51st employee could mean $100,000 in costs. I’ve been calling it the concrete ceiling,’ he said. ‘No employer is going to hire No. 51 if it brings all these mandates down on you, because they’re pretty onerous.’”
It’s been just one week since President Obama signed his unpopular health care bill into law and so far we’ve seen major employers hit with millions of dollars in new costs, other companies preparing to lay workers off, some small businesses hit with a new tanning tax, and others bracing for the impact of new fees and mandates.
This health care bill is a job killer, and it should be repealed and replaced. As House Republican Leader John Boehner told The New York Times yesterday, “Republicans will fight to repeal ObamaCare and replace it with common-sense reforms that focus on lowering health care costs while protecting American jobs.” The message continues to be “repeal and replace” ObamaCare:
SEN. SCOTT BROWN (R-MA):“For starters, we can work in a bipartisan manner to repeal the worst parts of this bill. Americans have been clear that they do not like its $2.6 trillion cost, the higher taxes on families and businesses, the runaway spending, the state mandates, the sweetheart deals, and overcharging students to pay for health care. We should replace the worst parts of this legislation with solutions that would actually lower costs and improve the quality of care — such as allowing individuals to purchase insurance across state lines, measures that will prevent waste, fraud and abuse, support for increased prevention and wellness programs, and reforms to limit costly litigation and defensive medicine.” (Sen. Scott Brown, Op-Ed, “The Health Care Fight Is Not Over,” The Boston Globe, 3/30/10)
SEN. JIM DEMINT (R-SC):“We’ll find out in November who won or lost this battle. Over 60% of Americans still want Republicans to fight to repeal this. So what I do next is I`m trying to replace those who voted for this bill. I want to repeal it. And I want to replace it with some real reform that puts patients in charge of their health care again.”(CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 3/28/10)
NBC’s DAVID GREGORY: “Senator Graham, despite what you say, is a campaign of repeal -- you're a pragmatic legislator -- is that realistic?” SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): “Yes, only if you replace it. It is realistic to let the American people know the Class Act, which is a new entitlement where the government offers long-term health care insurance to the population, collects $78 billion in premiums to use to be paid for this bill so when the money is spent to pay for the health care bill, and when you need your Class Act coverage, there is no money there. It is good to repeal the cuts in Medicare and to repeal the massive tax increases and replace it with opportunities to buy insurance from the private sector without cutting Medicare and raising taxes and using budget Ponzi schemes like the Class Act. Yes, there is a way to do that, and 16 million people are dumped into Medicaid. My state is going to get killed by having to serve more Medicaid people. It's going to hurt state budgets.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 3/28/10) Tags:Obamacare, economic costs, employers, GOP, Repeal the bill, government health care To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Tony Perkins, FRC Washington Update:
The Clinton Administration compromise policy known as "Don't Ask Don't Tell" is bad enough, given that it conflicts with the actual statute passed by Congress (which says that allowing homosexuals in the military "would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion"). But today, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced new regulations that leave the Pentagon tiptoeing even further around enforcement of the statutory law. The new guidelines will sharply narrow the kind of evidence that can be used to begin an investigation of alleged homosexuality, while raising the rank of those authorized to initiate such investigations to general and admirals--who have no time to deal with disciplining individual service members.
The net effect will be to add a "Don't Listen, Don't Enforce" approach to the already unacceptably weak "Don't Ask Don't Tell" compromise. Unless and until Congress changes the law--which would be a serious mistake--the President and Secretary of Defense should live up to their oath to "faithfully execute" the law, instead of seeking out ways to evade it. Over eighty percent of the world's countries--including the ten largest military forces in the world, ones designed to actually fight and win wars, not just march in parades--still exclude homosexuals from the ranks of the armed forces. National security, not political correctness, should determine our military personnel policies. Tags:military, Don't Ask Don't Tell, Tony Perkins, FRC, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
“Illinois Tool Works Inc. Lowered Its First Quarter And Yearly Earnings Forecast Tuesday Due To Costs Related To The Health Care Legislation Recently Passed By Congress. The Industrial Equipment Maker Said It Will Record A Tax Adjustment Of $22 Million, Or 4 Cents Per Share, To Reflect The Fact That Future Medicare Prescription Drug Subsidies Received By The Company For Retiree Prescription Drug Coverage Will Now Be Taxable.” (“Illinois Tool Works Lowers Outlook,” The Associated Press, 3/30/10) Tags:government health care, economic costs, Boeing, Goodrich, Illinois Tool, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
“Owners Of Salons Such As Siren Tan In West Des Moines Said Are Not Happy About It. Congress will be collecting an extra 10 percent tax on indoor tanning starting July 1. The plan is to raise $2.7 billion during the next 10 years. In part, it will be used to pay for health risks blamed on too much tanning.” (“Tanning Tax Burns Salon Owners,” KCCI [Des Moines, IA], 3/29/10)
Today in Washington, D.C. - Mar 30, 2010 - More Polling Shows Americans Do Not Beleive In ObamaCare
Congress is in Recess. Another week brings yet another poll showing that Americans simply don’t by the claims from the Obama administration and congressional Democrats about what their $2.6 trillion health care takeover will do. Less than a quarter of Americans in a Gallup poll released today believe the key claims made over and over by proponents of the bill: Only 21% believe costs will go down; 22% predict their own health care situation will improve; 23% say the deficit will get better; and 24% think their health care coverage will improve. Meanwhile, pluralities see all four areas getting worse under the Democrats’ bill.
And though President Obama has sold the bill as reducing health care costs and Democrat leaders like House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer have claimed it’s the biggest deficit reducing measure in over a decade, these talking points ring hollow with a majority of Americans. The Gallup poll finds 50% believe they’ll see higher costs for themselves and their families, 55% believe overall costs of health care in the U.S. will get worse. And 61% say the deficit will get worse thanks to the Democrats’ health care bill.
The skepticism of regular Americans to this health care boondoggle is certainly warranted, considering the stories that are coming out one after another of the consequences of passing this ill-considered bill. The AP reports today, “Under the health care overhaul, young adults who buy their own insurance will carry a heavier burden of the medical costs of older Americans — a shift expected to raise insurance premiums for young people when the plan takes full effect. Beginning in 2014, most Americans will be required to buy insurance or pay a tax penalty. That's when premiums for young adults seeking coverage on the individual market would likely climb by 17 percent on average, or roughly $42 a month, according to an analysis of the plan conducted for The Associated Press. . . . The higher costs will pinch many people in their 20s and early 30s who are struggling to start or advance their careers with the highest unemployment rate in 26 years.”
Even the number two Democrat in the Senate, Dick Durbin, admitted that premiums will still go up if this expensive health care bill became law. He said on the Senate floor, “Anyone who would stand before you and say well, if you pass health care reform, next year's health care premiums are going down, I don't think is telling the truth. I think it is likely they would go up, but what we're trying to do is slow the rate of increase.”
And throughout the debate on the health care bill, both the Congressional Budget Office and the Obama administration’s own actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said the Democrats’ bill doesn’t lower costs. CBO said federal health care spending “would increase by about $210 billion” and CMS stated that the bill “would increase [health expenditures] by an estimated total of $222 billion” over the next decade.
So it’s easy to see why the public just doesn’t believe the claims of Democrats. Today, President Obama is celebrating signing the partisan reconciliation bill that makes the original health care bill even worse, through higher taxes, more Medicare cuts, and more special deals. I believe most readers will agree with the words of Senator Mitch McConnell on Saturday, “Most people aren’t interested in celebrating a bill that makes their lives more complicated, takes more out of their paychecks and puts decisions they’re used to making themselves into the hands of federal bureaucrats. Most people aren’t celebrating the fact that their insurance premiums will go up. Seniors aren’t popping champagne corks at more than a half a trillion dollars in Medicare cuts. And, job creators, already struggling in a down economy, aren’t doing any cartwheels over all the mandates and new taxes they’ll have to shoulder as a result of this bill.” Tags:Washington D.C., polls, polling, Gallup, government health care, higher premiums, CBO To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: While the liberal media continues to lecture conservatives about civility, news broke today that the FBI arrested a Pennsylvania man, Norman Leboon, for making an online death threat against House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia. Last week, Leboon posted a profanity-laced rant against the conservative Jewish congressman on YouTube. In his diatribe, Leboon, who claims to be a Muslim convert, threatened to kill Cantor and his family. It turns out that Norman Leboon also donated $505 to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.
The man appears to be a complete loon who has made many threats, so I won’t try to make him a “poster boy” for the Left. But, if the situation were reversed – if a Tea Party member who donated to John McCain’s campaign had been arrested for threatening to assassinate a Democrat leader – it would be headline news for days. There would be calls for the GOP to renounce and condemn the Tea Party. There would be much ink spent on column after column about the extremism on the Right. And, of course, all of it would be due to obvious racism.
Over the weekend, New York Times columnist Frank Rich again picked up the canard that conservative opposition to healthcare “reform” is based on some “ism” or phobia. Rich wrote:
“If Obama’s first legislative priority had been immigration or financial reform or climate change, we would have seen the same trajectory. The conjunction of a black president and a female speaker of the House — topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay Congressional committee chairman — would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play.”
In one sentence, Rich dismissed the concerns of nearly half the country (based on the latest polls) for its alleged racism, sexism, xenophobia and homophobia. Once again, the “tolerant” Left is proving just how intolerant it can be.
So, I ask Rich this simple question: If a future black president and a female future Speaker of the House and a wise Latina on the Supreme Court were pushing for lower taxes, smaller government, a strong national defense and adherence to our Constitution, does he really think that the streets would be filled with Tea Party members demonstrating in opposition? Of course not! They might be in the streets cheering, but I suspect Rich would still find something to complain about. Gary Bauer is is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families. He submitted this article in an email to the ARRA News Service Editor. Bauer was a former Republican presidential candidate and served as President Ronald Reagan’s domestic policy adviser.Tags:Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, liberals, left, conservatives, smears, GOP, TEA Party To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
INDIANAPOLIS STAR: “The Legislation, In Fact, Is Likely To Accelerate Price Increases In Some Areas Of Health Care. For Instance, A Tax Increase On Medical Device Companies Is Sure To Be Passed On To Consumers And Their Insurers.”(Editorial, “Vote Is Done But Debate Continues,” Indianapolis Star, 3/23/10) Tags:health care, increased costs, medical devices, Indiana, MINNESOTA To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru
#Conservative #Constitution #NRA #GunRights #military 22 yr #veteran #professor #Christian #ProLife #TCOT #SGP #CCOT #schoolchoice #fairtax Married-50+yrs #MAGA
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting the beliefs associated with the ARRA, this blog/site is not controlled by nor funded by the ARRA. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.