Obama Confronts the 2010 Election Results

Source of original via FaceBook.

The Cartoonist is AF Branco

---

Tags: cartoon, political cartoon, 2010 election, election results, Barack Obama, democrats, GOP, AF Branco
  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Who Seized Control on November 2, 2010?

Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: When I read the following article by Russ Roberts which he called "Seizing Control," I said points well taken. On Tuesday, the Republicans didn't seize control of the US House and numerous positions across the country. Just as the democrats did not seize control of positions or the presidency in 2008. Concerning Tuesday's election, Roberts rightly concludes, "It was the people who voted essentially gave the Republicans control. . . . And if the Republicans don’t do a good job, the voters will let the Dems run the House again." However, another truth also remains after this election:  an awakened electorate has arisen. "We the People" cannot sleep or rest on our laurals. It is accountability time!  There is a concluding comment after the following article.

---

by Russ Roberts, Cafe Hayek: When people tell me how mad they are at Wal-Mart for driving the mom-and-pop stores out of business, I ask them how Wal-Mart managed to do that. Did they go around torching their stores in the middle of the night, threatening the moms and the pops with baseball bats if they didn’t close their stores?

The consumers drove the mom and pops out of business. The consumers preferred Wal-Mart (and Target and K-Mart) to the mom-and-pops. To the extent Wal-Mart did the driving, it was by offering better products at better prices.

I was thinking of that yesterday when I saw the headline in the Washington Post: "GOP Seizes Control of House"

I know, it’s just an expression. But they didn’t seize control. The voters essentially gave the Republicans control. (I say “essentially” because voters don’t vote for who gets control–they vote for an individual politician.) And if the Republicans don’t do a good job, the voters will let the Dems run the House again.

And for those of you reading this via email and uncertain of who’s writing this post, I’ll let you know that I voted on Tuesday. . . .

---

Editor's Concluding Comment: We are at a reset point. It is accountability time!  As I wrote in "Being a Conservative Is Not For The Faint Of Heart":

"However, even if there was maximum success in November in getting elected people with conservative core values to Congress, to State offices, to county offices and to local government, this will not turn everything around and would not put things back in good order. Which means, we will not be able to return to a state of indifferent concern. The "battle" for our ideals does not stop with any measured success on November 2010. While we can gain a reset point, the job will not be done for conservatives. Conservatives will need to continue to be vigilant in holding elected people to their promises, in demanding that the influence of government in our lives be rolled back, and in preparing for the next election with even greater involvement by the people."

---

Tags: 2010 election, seized control, viewpoint, voters, citizens, We the People, Republicans, Democrats, elections, voting, accountability, reset point To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

The Death Panel - Kill ObamaCare

by William Warren

Tags: American Voters, Death Panels, Elections 2010, ObamaCare, Political Cartoons, William Warren, government health care bill, Congress, kill the bill, we the people, voters To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Rasmussen Report: Election 2010 Wrap Up - November 5, 2010

Rasmussen Video: Generic polling clearly showed since Dec 2009, Republicans were going to make large gains in the U.S. House. Projected back then at at 62 seats. the only polling surprise was the Nevada race with Harry Reid winning when polls projected his opponent would win. Listen to Scott Rasmussen's comments on his video report.
-----------
ARRA News Editor Comment: One item which Rasmussen and other pollsters cannot properly reflect in their polls is the extent of the impact of corruption. In Nevada, the unions run the polling machines. Many of the poll workers are union, former union workers, or related to union or government employees. Most Hotels and gaming institutions are union. Reid is a past Nevada gaming commissioner. Without Las Vegas, Reno and a few other smaller gambling towns, Nevada is principally a big desert and arid mountain areas with a "big canyon, a few Federal lakes and dams tossed in to the mix. Will the people of Nevada ever be truly free - who knows. Free to gamble - yes; but, free of corruptible influences from numerous sources - wishful thinking. Even, Las Vegas proudly wears the words "Sin City." So "Dingy Harry" may indeed truly represent his constituents.

Unfortunately, all Americans are impacted by "Dingy Harry" return to the US Senate to lead the Lame Duck session. Reid is also expected to continue as the Democratic Senate Majority Leader in January, 2011 but with fewer of his old cronies in the Senate supporting him. While it would be best for the Democratic caucus not to return Reid to leadership of the Senate, maybe there is a silver lining for the Republicans if Reid stays in his leadership position. Reid has been and will be a "gift that keeps on giving" via his antics, actions, arrogance and very stupid statements. Reid may be the lighting rod that helps turn the US Senate "red" in 2012 if the few RINOs keep out of the way.

---

Tags: Scott Rasmussen, Rasmussen Report, wrap-up 2010 Election, video, polling, ARRA News, comments, Harry Reid To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Sarah Palin's Post Election Response - "Together"

SarahPalinAK - SarahPac Video

---

Tags: Sarah Palin, time tested truths, American, great nation, weather tough times, today's challenges, confident, hopeful, our movement, morning in America, we the people, stand up, speak out, going rouge, Mama Grizzlies, SarahPAC To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Rep Boehner: Americans Expect Washington to Stop All the Tax Hikes

Rep. John Boehner with ABC's Diane Sawyer

IN SIT-DOWN INTERVIEWS WITH ABC AND FOX NEWS, BOEHNER SAYS HE WILL NOT COMPROMISE ON THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, PRAISES TEA PARTY FOR HELPING TO “REINVIGORATE OUR DEMOCRACY”
In sit-down interviews with ABC’s Diane Sawyer and Fox News’ Bret Baier, House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) talks about Republicans’ commitment to listening to the American people and going to work on their priorities: creating jobs, cutting spending, and making Congress more accountable to the people it serves.  Specifically, Leader Boehner told Baier that this week’s events make it clear the American people want us to “stop all the tax hikes and cut spending,” which is exactly what Republicans have proposed in the Pledge to America.  During the interview with Sawyer, Boehner recounted his experiences meeting with Tea Party activists coast-to-coast and said we ought to welcome their participation because it’s going to “reinvigorate our democracy.”  Following are videos of the interviews, along with selected excerpts:

FROM FOX NEWS’ SPECIAL REPORT Video 1

FROM ABC WORLD NEWS Video2

ON FOX, BOEHNER SAYS STOPPING ALL THE TAX HIKES IS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE:
“In our Pledge to America, we made clear that we believe that all the current tax rates should be extended for all Americans and permanently. ... The American people spoke on election night. It was their opportunity to send Washington a message. And the message they sent was stop the tax hikes and stop the spending. . . . I am not going to compromise on my principles nor am I going to compromise the will of the American people. To the extent that the president wants to work with us on reducing the size, scope and the intrusion of the federal government, we're willing to work with him.”

ON ABC, BOEHNER SAYS DEMOCRATS ARE IN “DENIAL” OVER VOTERS’ REJECTION OF THEIR JOB-KILLING POLICIES:
“There seems to be some denial on the part of the President. . . . When you have the historic election in over 60-70 years, you would think that the other party would understand that the American people have clearly repudiated the policies that they put forward over the last two years.”

ON ABC, BOEHNER PRAISES TEA PARTY’S CONTRIBUTION TO STRENGTHENING OUR DEMOCRACY AND POLITICAL PROCESS:
“You know, I’ve been to my fair share of Tea Party events over the course of the last year.  I’ve been in over 100 congressional districts and talked to a lot of Tea Party activists along the way. . . . None of them have ever been involved in the political process before. I think we as Americans ought to welcome that participation. I think it’s going to reinvigorate our democracy, and be a really good thing for the country.”

ON FOX, BOEHNER DISCUSSES REPEALING OBAMACARE AND REPLACING IT WITH COMMON SENSE REFORMS THAT LOWER COSTS, PROTECT JOBS:
“This health care bill will ruin the best health care system in the world and it will bankrupt our country. . . . And secondly, let’s not forget, this is also about jobs. And if you look at all of the requirements on employers, you can understand why they’re not hiring new employees, because we’ve raised the cost of employment. . . . and trust me, I’m going to make sure this health care bill never ever, ever is implemented.”

---

Tags: John Boehner, US House, Republican leader, ABC, tax hicks, stopping Obamacare, government spending, tax increases To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Sen. McConnell: Listening to the People Who Sent Us Here

Bill Smith, Editor: After weeks of President Barack Obama traveling the country and attacking Republicans, TEA Party activists, and anyone else who disagreed with his agenda, the American people rendered their response on November 2nd by returning control of the US House to the Republicans and increasing the number of Republicans in the Senate to the point that it will be easier to hold President Obama accountable.

Brainless news and political pundits now appear to be pushing the agenda for the left by repeatedly asking Republicans if they will compromise with Democrats and the agenda which has already been pushed through Congress in the first 22 months of the Obama administration.

U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) spoke this morning at the Heritage Foundation. Below is a complete copy of his speech with some key points highlighted which evidence that he has and is listening to the American people. While not addressed herein, U.S. House Republican Leader Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) has expressed similar comments. The top House and Senate Republican leaders are declaring that they understand the message sent by the voters on election day. Unfortunately, The Examiner is reporting that a few establishment Republicans like RINO Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC) and former Sen. Trent Lott (MS ) have "taken it upon themselves to blame Sarah Palin and the Tea Party for the failure of Republicans to capture control of the Senate." This topic will be addressed at another time.

---

Sen. Mitch McConnell

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell delivered the following address to The Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. - 11/4/2010: “Over the past two years, the American people looked at what was going on in Washington and they became increasingly worried. Not only were Democratic leaders ignoring our nation’s ongoing job crisis; their big-government policies and out-of-control spending was causing some to wonder about the future of the American dream itself. “Americans worried about the consequences of a $14 trillion debt; about a health care bill that creates 159 new bureaucratic entities, including two massive new entitlement programs; they worried about all the bailouts, and they worried about every other piece of legislation that seemed like it was designed to kill jobs rather than create them. “Most of all, they worried that what some have called the Europeanization of America would continue unchecked, and that, as a result, our children and grandchildren could no longer expect to have the same opportunities that we’ve had. “Two days ago, those worries gave way to a new optimism. For the past two years, Democrat lawmakers chose to ignore the American people, so on Tuesday the American people chose new lawmakers. They held their elected representatives to account. And they demonstrated to all of us that Constitutional conservatism is alive and well.

“This isn’t a reason for Republicans to gloat; rather, it’s a time for both parties to realize who’s really in charge — the people — and to be grateful for the opportunity we now have to begin to turn this ship around. Tuesday was a referendum, not a choice. It was a report card on the administration and anyone who supported its agenda, plain and simple.

“It doesn’t take a roomful of political scientists to figure it out. Americans voted for change in the last two elections because of two long and difficult wars and because they hoped a changing of the guard would stabilize the economy and get America moving again. And then the people they elected set about dismantling the free market, handing out political favors at taxpayer expense, expanding government, and creating a more precarious future for our children. In other words, Democrat leaders used the crisis of the moment to advance an agenda Americans didn’t ask for and couldn’t afford. And then they ignored and dismissed anyone who dared to speak out against it.

“So the voters didn’t suddenly fall in love with Republicans; they fell out of love with Democrats. And while they may have voted to send more Republicans to Washington, they’re sending them here with clear marching orders: stop the big-government freight train and respect the will of the people who sent you there. As Churchill once observed, “Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; [and] courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.” And I can’t think of a better way to sum up Tuesday’s election than that.

“This morning, I would like to talk a little bit more about how we got here, and the task ahead. And I wanted to do it here at the Heritage Foundation, because for nearly 40 years Heritage has played a crucial role in promoting and defending the principles of free enterprise, limited government, freedom, and a strong defense — in other words, the very principles the American people voted to uphold in Tuesday’s historic election.

“First: how we got here. Let’s cast our minds back for a moment to early 2009. I think a “Newsweek” cover from early February sums up the conventional wisdom in Washington at the time, at least among a lot of Democrats. It read, “We’re All Socialists Now”. And I’ll just note parenthetically that “Newsweek” was recently sold for less than the cover price of a single copy of the magazine. Hopefully the Democrats don’t bail them out too.

“Anyway, while the media was still groping to define the 2008 election, Republicans were taking stock. We knew the principles that had made our party great were the same principles that had made America great, and that if we were going to solve the problems of the day, we would have to embrace and explain those principles, not discard or conceal them. So we renewed our commitment to our core principles — win, lose, or draw.

“If we had not done this, the administration would never suffer the consequences for pushing policies Americans opposed, and Americans wouldn’t have a clear alternative. And that is why this, in my view, was the single most important thing Republicans in Congress did to prepare the ground for Tuesday’s election. By sticking together in principled opposition to policies we viewed as harmful, we made it perfectly clear to the American people where we stood. And we gave voters a real choice on Election Day.

“At the same time, we made it perfectly clear from the beginning that if President Obama proposed policies that were consistent with our principles, we’d work with him. Just two days after the Inauguration, in fact, I made a public offer at the National Press Club to accept the President’s campaign promise of post-partisanship by proposing to work with him on a number of goals that he himself had suggested, such as reforming entitlements, reducing the debt, increasing our energy independence, and lowering taxes to create jobs.

“But it turned out the White House had different plans. Their strategy from the start, as I said, was to govern hard-left and use their big majorities to push through the most left-wing agenda possible, squeezing unpopular proposals through Congress by the slimmest majorities and hoping Americans would forget the details and the unseemly process over time. The Democrats’ idea of consensus was for Republicans to do whatever the administration wanted us to. And that’s why they plowed ahead from the very beginning with one piece of legislation after another written by liberals for liberals.

“And so by the spring of 2009, they had given us ample opportunity to stand up for the principles of limited government, lower taxes, and a strong defense. First, they called for closing Guantanamo without any plan for housing the terrorists who were held there; they had forced through their trillion dollar Stimulus; proposed a federal budget that would double the national debt in five years and triple it in 10; and bailed out automakers that should have been allowed to reorganize or fail. And it shouldn’t be lost on anybody, by the way, that the only one that refused a bailout, Ford, is the one that’s doing best today.

“As Democrats governed left, Republicans stood together time and again, making the case for conservative alternatives. And over the course of 19 months, Democrats added $3 trillion to the debt, more than 2.5 million Americans would lose their jobs … and Republicans would win races in states that had gone solidly for Democrats in 2008 —states like Virginia, New Jersey, and, of all places, Massachusetts. Clearly, the Democrat agenda was not the change Americans had hoped for. And Republicans were offering a clear alternative. That was the message of those races. And that was the message on Tuesday.

“The question now is whether Americans were wise to entrust Republicans with the task of reversing the damage. In answer, I would argue that Republicans can be entrusted with the task voters have given us — not because we say so, but because we’ve already been at it for two years. We have shown that we share the priorities the people have voiced. We have fought to defend them. Now we’re ready to get back to work on their behalf.

“Which raises a practical question: what can Americans expect from Republicans now?

“Let’s start with the big picture. Over the past week, some have said it was indelicate of me to suggest that our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term in office. But the fact is, if our primary legislative goals are to repeal and replace the health spending bill; to end the bailouts; cut spending; and shrink the size and scope of government, the only way to do all these things it is to put someone in the White House who won’t veto any of these things. We can hope the President will start listening to the electorate after Tuesday’s election. But we can’t plan on it. And it would be foolish to expect that Republicans will be able to completely reverse the damage Democrats have done as long as a Democrat holds the veto pen.

“There’s just no getting around it.

“By their own admission, leaders of the Republican Revolution of 1994 think their greatest mistake was overlooking the power of the veto. They gave the impression they were somehow in charge when they weren’t. And after President Clinton vetoed their bills, making it impossible for them to accomplish all their goals, they ended up being viewed as failures, sellouts, or both. Today, Democrats not only have the White House. They have the Senate too. So we have to be realistic about what we can and cannot achieve, while at the same recognizing that realism should never be confused with capitulation.

“On health care, that means we can — and should — propose and vote on straight repeal, repeatedly. But we can’t expect the president to sign it. So we’ll also have to work, in the House, on denying funds for implementation, and, in the Senate, on votes against its most egregious provisions. At the same time, we’ll need to continue educating the public about the ill-effects of this bill on individuals young and old, families, and small businesses.

“And this is why oversight will play a crucial role in Republican efforts going forward.

“We may not be able to bring about straight repeal in the next two years, and we may not win every vote against targeted provisions, even though we should have bipartisan support for some. But we can compel administration officials to attempt to defend this indefensible health spending bill and other costly, government-driven measures, like the Stimulus and financial reform. We also need groups like Heritage to continue studying the ill-effects of the health care bill, and to show how its implementation is hurting families, seniors, and small businesses, limiting choices and making us less competitive. We welcome any help we can get in reversing the damage this bill has done and will do.

“Through oversight we’ll also keep a spotlight on the various agencies the administration will now use to advance through regulation what it can’t through legislation. Potential backdoor efforts in this area could include imposing a new national energy tax through the EPA now that cap-and-trade is dead, additional health care provisions through HHS, Card Check through the National Labor Relations Board, and some form of immigration change through the use of administrative amnesty and the selective enforcement of our laws.

“Good oversight can also make more accountable all the policy czars the administration has installed without any accountability to Congress or the American people.

“Another obstacle is the temptation to over-read our task. It’s my view that Americans are no more interested in a Republican plan for using government to reengineer society than they were in the Democrats’ plan to do so. Government has limits, thank heavens, and voters want us to respect them. That’s why Republicans will focus on doing a few things well.

“We will stop the liberal onslaught. We will make the case for repeal of the health spending bill even as we vote to eliminate its worst parts. We will vote to freeze and cut discretionary spending. We will fight to make sure that any spending bill that reaches the Senate floor is amendable, so members can vote for the spending cuts Americans are asking for. We will push to bring up and vote for House passed spending rescission bills.

“On the economy, we will work hard to ensure Democrats don’t raise taxes on anybody, especially in the middle of a recession. We will loudly oppose future stimulus bills that only stimulate the deficit and fight any further job-killing regulations. We will fight tooth and nail on behalf of Americans struggling to find and create jobs.

“And when it comes to educating the public about the effects of Democrat legislation, we will fulfill our constitutional duty to oversee the Executive Branch through smart, aggressive oversight.

“We will scrutinize Democrat legislation and force them to defend it. And we will continue to make the case that the Democrats’ big-government vision hinders freedom, prosperity, and opportunity — and that while it may benefit some in the short-term, it exposes everyone to calamity down the road.

“If we do these things well over the next two years, I believe the voters will be pleased with what they did on Tuesday, and Republicans will be in a much better position to reverse the worst excesses of the past two years and lay the groundwork for the kind of change we want and need. Meanwhile, Republican governors will help by showing at the state level that the kind of change we want is not only possible but also effective in cutting waste, creating jobs, and showing that government can work for people, not against them. Think tanks like Heritage will help too by arming us with ideas and tools like this week’s Checklist for getting America back on track. And Tea Party activists will continue to energize our party and challenge us to follow through on our commitments.

“None of this is to say that Republicans have given up cooperating with the President. The American people reminded us this week that we work for them, and we owe it to them and future generations to work together to find solutions to present troubles and to help guide our nation to better days. But, as I see it, the White House has a choice: they can change course, or they can double down on a vision of government that the American people have roundly rejected. If they choose the former, they’ll find a partner in Republicans. If they don’t, we will have more disagreements ahead.

“The formula is simple, really: when the administration agrees with the American people, we will agree with the administration. When it disagrees with the American people, we won’t. This has been our posture from the beginning of this administration. And we intend to stick with it. If the administration wants cooperation, it will have to begin to move in our direction.

“There is no reason we can’t work together to prevent a tax hike on small businesses. There’s no reason we can’t work together on energy independence, cutting spending, or increasing American exports by completing free trade agreements. And we can continue to work together to give our armed forces in Afghanistan, Iraq and around the world whatever they need to accomplish their mission.

“So this morning I re-extend an offer that’s been on the table for two years to cooperate on shared goals — because ultimately this isn’t about an election; it’s about doing what’s best for our country. The American people want us to put aside the left-wing wish list and work together on helping to create jobs and restore the economy to health and prosperity. There is no reason the two parties can’t work together on achieving these goals.

“But whether or not the administration has a mid-course correction, Republicans have a plan for following through on the wishes of the American people. It starts with gratitude and a certain humility for the task we’ve been handed. It means sticking ever more closely to the conservative principles that got us here. It means learning the lessons of history. And, above all, it means listening to the people who sent us here. If we do all this, we will finish the job.

---

Tags: Mitch McConnell, voters, 2010 elections, listening, American people, Barack Obama, Obama agenda, repeal Obamacare, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Join the AFP November Speaks Virtual March

American's For Prosperity (AFP): The lame duck session is now a reality, with both the House and Senate set to return November 15 for a one week session, followed by a one-week break for Thanksgiving, and at least one more week at the beginning of December.  It is possible it could stay in session throughout December in a reply of last year’s Christmas Eve health care vote.

A recent article in The Hill indicated Democrats may try to pass as many as 20 bills in the lame duck session, and there is still some risk of an all-out push on everything from energy to card check to enormous Social Security tax hikes based on the president’s deficit commission recommendations.

We need your help to send Congress these clear messages!

1. These are the first votes of the 2012  cycle and public anger is not going away.
2. You have no  right to raise taxes on any American while the economy remains weak  and after class-warfare, tax-the-rich ideas were decisively rejected in a  national election.
3. It’s  wrong to cheat the American people by voting to fund  ObamaCare  before a new Congress elected not to fund it can be seated.

Visit November Speaks and join the virtual rally!

---

Tags: November Speaks, lame duck, session, US Congress, AFP, virtual rally To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Demplosion - Results of 2010 Election

Ten second video representation of what happened on Tuesday, Nov 2nd, 2010. Yes, the video was made 19 days ago and judge wrong on a couple of states , but it is still cool - Turn up the sound. Warning - while this video is very short, it is addictive :)

---

Tags: video, 2010 election, results, map, demplosion To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Thanks For The Memories - Goodby Speaker Pelosi

Right Change: The American People have sent Speaker Pelosi packing. RightChange releases the post election Politizoid "Thanks for the Memories" with full 20 piece orchestra. The 2010 Election is over and now on to dealing with the issues of the day.

---

Tags: Right Change, Pelosi, 2010 Election, 2012 Election, Thanks for the Memories, Poltizoid, Tea Party, Converative, being conservative To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

American People Sent A Message Last Night And Republicans Are Listening

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said last night, “Americans have been speaking out for two years to cut wasteful Washington spending, reduce the size and scope of the federal bureaucracy, and help create sustainable, private-sector jobs. While Democrats in Washington too often acted as if they didn’t hear the message, tonight the voters ensured their message was heard loud and clear. Looking ahead, Republicans will continue to stand up for the American people and for the priorities they voted for today, and we are hopeful the administration and Democrat leaders will change course.”

Describing the message from voters last night, The Washington Post writes today, “As Democrats suffered steep losses nationwide, evidence mounted that the election was at least in part a repudiation of the president. More than one-third of voters said they cast their ballots as a statement of opposition to Obama, substantially greater than the number that said they voted to support him, according to early exit polls. Meanwhile, a clear majority of all voters said they disapproved of his performance as president, although disapproval of Congress was even higher. More than half said Obama's policies will hurt the country in the long run, more than the number who said his policies would help.” Sen. McConnell noted this morning, “It's clear that choosing the President over your constituents is not a winning strategy.”

The Wall Street Journal editorializes, “[Democrats] were ousted from power after a mere two terms for having pursued an agenda they didn't advertise and that voters didn't want. Yes, the economy was the dominant issue and the root of much voter worry and frustration with Washington. But make no mistake, this was also an ideological repudiation of the Democratic agenda of the last two years. Independents turned with a vengeance on the same Democrats they had vaulted into the majority in the waning George W. Bush years, rejecting the economy-killing trio of $812 billion in stimulus spending, cap and tax and ObamaCare.”

And according to The New York Times, “Democrats lost significant support Tuesday among nearly all demographic groups in a midterm election that was a referendum on President Obama and a Democratic-controlled Congress in a stubbornly weak economy.” The NYT also notes, “Democrats suffered from defections as the electorate tilted conservative in a year when Republicans were enthusiastic about voting against President Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress. A majority of voters told interviewers they believed that government was doing too much. . . . A majority said they disapproved of President Obama’s job performance, and nearly 9 out of 10 of them voted for Republicans. About 4 in 10 said one reason for supporting a Republican for Congress was ‘to express opposition to Barack Obama.’ About half of voters said the president’s policies would hurt the country. An even bigger share of voters — nearly three-quarters — said they disapproved of how Congress had done its job. Those voters chose Republicans by about a two-to-one ratio. A strong majority agreed with the statement that ‘government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals,’ and by a nearly a four-to-one ratio they voted for Republicans.”

Americans sent a crystal clear message to Washington last night. As Leader McConnell said today, Republicans “are indeed humbled and ready to listen to the American people. And to lead on the issues that they've clearly indicated they care about.” Based on this statement by Sen. McConnell and his referenced article below, the voters got the attention of Republicans. The question remains: Did the voters get the attention of the Democrats?

See also: Sen. McConnell To Push For Repeal Of Health Care Law

Also, check out the video by Bankrupting America it's the economy, economy and big government:

---

Tags: voters, message, republicans, democrats, the message, the economy, jobs To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

November Has Arrived - Election Day

Vote as if your life and your family's future welfare depends on you doing so correctly -- it does!

---

Tags: November, 2010, 2010 election, vote, voting To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

The Liberals' Spending Delusions and the 2010 Elections

Chris Battle

By Chris Battle, Contributing Author: The churn building toward Election Day is achieving a kind of cannibalistic feeding frenzy as liberal pundits, Democratic strategists, and MoveOn activists try to spin the public’s coming rejection of the Obama agenda. It’s not that the White House and Democratic Congress tried to cram left-wing policies down the esophagus of a center-right nation; it’s that they didn’t cram hard enough.

Here is a typical lament from former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich: “A stimulus too small to significantly reduce unemployment, a TARP that didn't trickle down to Main Street, financial reform that doesn't fundamentally restructure Wall Street, and healthcare reforms that don't promise to bring down healthcare costs have all created an enthusiasm gap. They've fired up the right, demoralized the left, and generated unease among the general population.”

Building upon an already unsustainable defici , engaging in more spending to bail out reckless banks, issuing more regulation on the business community, and creating a true government-run healthcare system: This, he says, would have changed the election year dynamics--firing up liberal voters and demoralizing conservatives, resulting in victory for the Democratic majority. Nevermind that the Democrats are in trouble for exactly such thinking. Nevermind that the vast number of American voters have made clear--through polls, through votes in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, and through riotous town hall meetings--that they want less of this, not more.

Call it the Titanic Delusion. If only the ship had barreled faster toward the iceberg, it would have broken through to safety.

You hear this theory most frequently applied to healthcare reform. Americans were all for the reform, we are reminded. Until they weren’t. What happened in between? According to the Delusionists, Obama backed away from his promises and choked when he had the opportunity to create a single-payer (translation: government-run) healthcare system. And in the process of his retreat, he alienated his base and merely stirred up conservatives.

His base? That expansive voting coalition of academics, Code Pink, and California? Heck, you can’t even include the voters of Massachusetts in the mix, as those poor dupes were the first of the guinea pigs to get a taste of Obamacare. In the special election showdown of Scott Brown - Republican vs. Martha Coakley-Obamacare, Brown’s upset victory was an unmistakable statement of anxiety about the direction the Democrats were taking this country.

Except to the left. They are like narcissistic actors on the stage who mistake the rotten tomatoes hurled at them as kind-hearted gifts from people who can’t afford better, bless their hearts.

You see the same delusions applied to federal spending and the stimulus plan. Just as few Democrats dare to campaign on the issue of healthcare, you see just as few trotting out their votes for the stimulus. The public is in a rage over ever-expanding, ever-intruding government funded by breathtaking taxing, borrowing, and spending. When the Obama White House started floating the idea of a Stimulus II package--that is, more spending with no serious effort to cut elsewhere--Democrats in tough election battles began gathering their own rotten fruit in the form of television ads denouncing all things Washington--a town run by Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama. (Can Harry Reid, a man who cannot run his own campaign without stumbling over hideous gaffes, be said to be part of the ruling Triumvirate?)

We were told about all the shovel-ready jobs that would be funded by the stimulus. How unemployment would drop. What we got was funding for wasteful pet projects, more transference of wealth, and a new term for the American lexicon: “saved jobs.” But no new jobs. Unemployment went up. Taxes went up for job creators. Debt went up. And the deficit is going the way of Europe.

Evidently the problem is not that we now face historic levels of debt but that we haven’t spent ourselves into more debt, according to the liberal intelligentsia. Had Obama only spent more, borrowed more, taxed more … we would be on our way to economic recovery. And he to adulation and victory.

The New York Times’s Paul Krugman is the latest to voice this monotony. It’s not that Obama spent like a drunken sailor, he writes; it’s that he didn’t spend drunkenly enough. We didn’t even bother to bail out state governments that had gorged on programs they couldn’t afford for years, Krugman laments. The logic, I suppose, being that if the federal government isn’t spending with enough reckless abandon, then it should subsidize those governments that are. As long as there is spending, dammit, all will be well.
This, we are told, would surely have changed things at the polls.

The Krugmans of the world don’t believe it’s possible that regular voters, most of whom don’t boast a Nobel Prize in economics, could harbor a fundamental skepticism toward deficit spending. That they fear what they see taking place in Europe, where Obama-esque governments for years refused to cut any program and have now sunk under such a burden of debt that they are forced to slash at the worst possible time imaginable. Riots in France. Entire government agencies eliminated in Britain. And Greece? Should we even dare mention the unholy spectacle of Greece?

The American voter can’t possibly be worried about these things, say the Delusionists. Give them bread and circuses and they will move on their mindless way. Except they’re not. They are speaking with greater force at the polling booth.

The Delusionists are undeterred. Full steam ahead, fellows--these people will thank us afterwards!
--------------
Chris Battle is partner at Adfero Group, a public relations firm in Washington, DC. He submitted this article to the ARRA News Service Editor which also appears in US News He is also the editor of Security Debrief, a blog focused on homeland and national security issues. Previously, Battle served as chief of staff at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and director of congressional and public affairs for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

---

Tags: liberals, spending, delusions, 2010 elections, Chris Battle To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Sandra Day O’Connor Crosses Ethical Line to End Election of Judges

by John Bambenek, Big Government.com Retired Sandra Day O’Connor has had a busy month this month despite her retirement. Just this week she sat in on a federal appellate panel which struck down as unconstitutional Arizona’s law which requires voters prove that they are citizens. Apparently, it is an undue burden on non-citizens to prove that they actually are allowed to vote before giving them a ballot. Nice to see circular reasoning still prevails on the 9th Circuit.

Then, she appeared in a robocall at 1am in Nevada to campaign for a ballot proposition for so-called “merit selection” of judges. Part of the controversy is interesting since federal judges are required to refrain from political activity (for good reason) and appearing in a robocall clearly is political activity. There was, of course, the stunt of scheduling a modest number of robocalls at 1am to ensure massive media coverage of the proposition that might otherwise go unnoticed. It’s clever, really. Generate a moderate amount of controversy to bring attention to your candidate or cause, it’s been done before.

The interesting part of that story isn’t that she was doing robocalls (though that is a problem). The interesting part is what this proposition would entail. So-called “merit selection” of judges is simply a euphamistic way of saying “we’re going to take away the right to vote for judges from the citizens and give it to politicians and special interests.”

Of course, they don’t frame it like that. They say “oh, the special interests corrupt the process” and “judges have to raise money which means they’ll be tempted to trade favors” and “elections mean partisan politics and special interests can play mischief with judicial elections”. See, it’s all about reform.

Let’s take a look at the argument for a minute. I will concede special interests and political party bosses have too much influence in elections and government in general. However, the idea that the solution is to take the voters out of the equation and put it squarely in the hands of special interests and party bosses defies credulity.

Ultimately, it comes down to this, they think you are too stupid to pick good judges. They think that you, dear voters, will be duped by party bosses and special interests and pick lousy judges. They think that having retention elections (where voters can vote whether a judge keeps his job) takes away from the independence of the court. Or to put it another way, they are simply tired of being accountable to voters and would rather cater to those in power.

Many states appoint their judges now, however, there are several holdouts such as Illinois and Nevada. “Merit selection” will basically work like this, some group of “non-partisan” “citizens” will create a list of nominees from which the governor can select. Then there will be typically some legislative approval and/or confirmation.

Who will these citizens be? Almost always they will be lawyers in the state bar association or judges. The effect? To make sure that judges will always cater to the kind of lawyers who fester to the top of such associations… i.e. the lawyers you see at 11pm on commercials saying if you have bad gas “you have the right to collect large sums of cash from the richest person you can find.”

Now, it’s not that I have a problem with trial lawyers having their say in a judicial election. I do have a problem with them having an exclusive say in who can become a judge. And the idea that this process will have anything to do with merit is absurd. If “merit selection” comes to Illinois, I wonder what the going rate for such merit will be? $50,000? $100,000?

It comes down to this… if you believe the voters are too stupid to know what is best for them then support “merit selection” of judges (because we all know trial lawyers always have society’s best interests in mind). If you believe that the voters can make intelligent decisions, oppose this as the sham it is.

And the fact that Justice Sandra Day O’Connor supports this abridgment of suffrage says all we need to know about her jurisprudence.

---

Tags: judicial reform, merit selection, Nevada, Sandra Day O'Connor, shameless power grabs, Justice, Legal, Politics, State Government, State Politics, Supreme Court To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Slow Learner at the "Sanity" Rally

The Oracle at Guns and Religion
has the following great photo.
What is your opinion of this guy?

---

Tags: Sanity Rally, slow learner, progressive believe To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Americans Have Had It WSJ/NBC Poll Is A Rebuke To Democrats

Baring the impact of the claims by citizens of voting fraud in a number of states as well as the abuses of seniors being forced to hand over their absentee ballots, the pundits expect the democrats to take a bath in tomorrow's elections. Even in states like Arkansas where every precinct in the state is controlled by democrats, major gains are expected for the Republicans. The polls are clear, most local voters are upset with the the progressive Democrat agenda in Washington, D.C. If Republicans do not win as projected, it would be one of the greatest broad based thefts of the citizen's vote in American history.

The latest polls out today reiterate what Americans have been saying to Washington all year: they’re fed up with the policies of President Obama and the Democrat majority in Congress. Indeed, pollster Bill McInturff, who conducts the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll with pollster Peter Hart said, “This is a devastating set of data for the incumbent party. It is a rebuke to the last two years.”

NBC’s deputy political directory Mark Murray writes about the NBC/WSJ poll today, “Nearly 50 percent of likely voters prefer a GOP-controlled Congress, which is virtually unchanged from the poll taken two weeks ago; a plurality of all registered voters say it would be a ‘good thing’ if Republicans were in charge of both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate; and almost two-thirds — including about half of Democrats — want to see a significant amount of change in the way President Barack Obama has been leading the country.” Murray adds, “Obama’s job-approval rating in the survey . . . stands at 45 percent, a two-point decline from the last poll. More tellingly, a combined 63 percent — including 47 percent of Democrats — say they want to see ‘a great deal of change’ or ‘quite a bit of change’ in the way the president has been leading the country.”

Americans continue to express their frustration with the direction of the economy under Democrats. According to the NBC/WSJ poll, 84% say they’re “dissatisfied” with the state of the U.S. economy, including 55% who say they’re “very dissatisfied.” Interestingly, respondents were also asked, “Do you think if Democrats maintain control of Congress in November they will continue with the economic policies of Barack Obama,” and 63% said congressional Democrats would continue those policies. Combined with the nearly 50% who would prefer a Republican Congress and the 63% who say they want a “great deal of change” from the way the President has been leading the country, these numbers confirm that Americans are fed up with the economic policies of Democrats.

Recent polling also shows that Americans are continuing to express their disapproval with the health care law Democrats jammed through Congress over the objections of a majority of the country. The Wall Street Journal editorialized over the weekend, “This election is a referendum on an entitlement the public never wanted and continues to hate, as evidence from around the country is showing. Take almost any poll at random. Even this week's New York Times-CBS poll has repeal leading among likely voters, 47% to 43%. The latest Pew-National Journal survey shows that a majority of likely voters—51%—favors repeal, including 53% of independents. The Real Clear Politics average of all polling shows support for the law at 40.9%—and opposition at 50.6%.” The WSJ editors further noted, “In the 92 most-competitive districts that matter for controlling the House, a Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll found that 55% of voters favor the candidate who wants to repeal ObamaCare. Only 42% will vote for candidates who want to keep the law. Opposition is most intense among crucial voting blocks like independents and seniors; those who called the law ‘very bad’ outweighed the ‘very goods’ by 24 to 34 points.”

The Hill added, “President Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) needed every vote they could muster to push the [health care] bill through the House in March. The legislation passed 219-212, but for some Democrats, that vote could prove to be their political death. . . . [P]olling shows that Democrats have lost the message war this year on the landmark health law and in tight races, the yes votes could be the deciding factor. ‘In the end, it’s one of these cruel situations where a yes vote hurts you and a no vote doesn’t help very much,’ said Bruce Cain, the public policy director of the University of California Washington Center. ‘I think what’s going to happen is [voters are] going to punish Democrats who voted yes and not sufficiently reward those who voted no.’”

Clearly Americans have had it with Democrats’ policies, especially their approach to the economy and health care. To quote Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, “Americans have had it. They’ve had it with Democrats focusing on their own pet issues at the exclusion of Americans’ top priorities, and they’re tired of being told that if only the Democrats pass their agenda those priorities will be met. The results are in. The Democrat agenda has been a failure for the economy and for jobs. . . . It’s time to start listening instead of dictating. Americans are speaking out.”

---

Tags: polls, voters, rebuke, Democrats To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Herman Cain: Was in China - A Chilling and Depressing Realization

Update note 11/21/2012: Additional Links and photo were linked to the Herman's PAC which has closed.

Herman Cain, Contributing Author: I spent last week in China as part of a board meeting with some of our joint venture business partners based in China. It was my first time in China, and some of my preconceived notions were shattered, as is the case for many people who visit there for the first time. But other perceptions were confirmed.

China is a Communist country, but we were not met at the airport with machine gun-carrying soldiers. We were not harassed during our visit simply because we were Americans. In fact, we were warmly greeted and shown the best of hospitality by our business hosts and the government officials who were invited to attend our dinners and luncheons.

But Communism is about government control. And despite the warm hospitality and reforms instituted over the last 20 years to create a hybrid communist-capitalist country, Big Brother is still Big Brother. It’s just not as obvious as it was decades ago.

We visited the ancient Great Wall of China, which the Chinese started 200 years before Christ across their northern border, roughly 3,000 miles long, to protect themselves from their enemies to the north.

Today, there is another great wall technologically erected by the government to protect the people from outside influences. This wall blocks 1.3 billion people from social networking with the rest of the world. There’s no Facebook, YouTube, or Twitter allowed. There’s none coming into the country and there’s none going out.

When I tried to access my 40,000 friends on Facebook and Twitter, it was blank!

The government owns all three telecommunications companies, and simply restricts incoming information from those sources. Too much information and an open exchange of information are considered a threat to government control.

China welcomes foreign investment and ingenuity, but they do not welcome meddling into how they do things. And they certainly, would not want their people to get any ideas about challenging the government through social networking.

It is clear that China is trying to blend their traditional government control with some selective principles of capitalism to inspire entrepreneurial intensity. They are experiencing some success, as evidenced by their explosive economic growth – about 10 percent GDP growth per year. The Chinese will privately admit that there are some growing pains with such a high rate of growth, but they are willing to bear them the pain for the sake of a vibrant and growing economy.

While traveling from Shanghai to Nanjing to Beijing, it was obvious that China’s infrastructure development is on a fast track. One of our tour guides during an outing even joked that the crane has become China’s national bird. As in “construction crane”!

I didn’t say it was funny. And when we inquired about areas other than construction, we learned that their growth in industrial and technology capabilities was equally intense.

One evening, we received a presentation from an economist who teaches at one of the universities in China, and he acknowledged that if they continue to grow at that high rate and the U.S. continues to grow at our anemic rate, then in 15 to 20 years, China’s economy will be as big as the U.S. economy.

Red light! If our biggest lender becomes the world’s biggest economy with an aspiring world military presence, then our national security could be severely compromised. I have a big problem with that!

China’s rapid economic growth is no big surprise. But when you see and hear it firsthand, coupled with its central government control, there is a chilling and depressing realization. America’s economic and military strength could become second in the world.

That’s a not a perception. It’s reality. But it can be stopped if we counter with American-style strength – a reinvigorated economy combined with real freedom. No countervailing force can stand up to that.

---

Tags: Herman Cain, China, United States, economy, military, commentary To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Want a Christian roommate? Don’t say so in Michigan

Update by Kerby Anderson - 11/15/10: You might think that the agency would merely dismiss the complaint as ridiculous since the notice is an example of what men and women looking for roommates do all the time. But instead, the agency flew into action. They determined the case to be legitimate and began an investigation. An agency spokesman said that a regulation of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development states that it is a “violation to make, print or publish or cause to be made, printed or published any notice, statement or advertisement with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference” for a list of nondiscrimination categories, including religious belief.  So far, Tricia has been threatened with fines and mandatory enrollment in “fair housing training.”

Fortunately, the Alliance Defense Fund has intervened and sent a letter to the state explaining that such housing rules don’t apply to people living in their own homes wanting to share resources. It explains that Tricia “is a single lady looking for a roommate. She is not a landlord. She does not own a management company. She does not run an apartment complex. She is a single person seeking to have a roommate live with her in her house.” Joel Oster with the Alliance Defense Fund said: “Christians shouldn’t live in fear of being punished for being Christians. It is completely absurd to try to penalize a single Christian woman for privately seeking a Christian roommate at church.”
---------------

Chris Slavens

By Chris Slavens, Guest Author: Do we have the right to choose who we live with?

It’s a valid question, now that the Fair Housing Center of West Michigan is attacking an unnamed woman for seeking a Christian roommate. The 31-year-old, who is single, posted the advertisement at her church last July.

“Christian roommate wanted,” she wrote, and included her contact information. Seems harmless enough, right? What churchgoer could possibly find such an ad to be offensive? And what government agency could possibly take such a complaint seriously?

The case is in the hands of the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, and the woman could be required to pay hefty fines and take what FHCWM Executive Director Nancy Haynes describes as “fair housing training.”

The FHCWM argues that the woman’s advertisement “expresses an illegal preference for a Christian roommate, thus excluding people of other faiths,” thereby violating Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act. More commonly referred to as the Fair Housing Act, it prohibits illegal housing discrimination, including discrimination based on race, color, religion, gender, familial status, national origin, and disability status.

One of the problems with the FHCWM’s argument—and there are many—is that the Fair Housing Act does not negate the rights recognized by the First Amendment, including freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion. It is entirely natural for an unmarried Christian woman to want to live with someone who shares her beliefs about right and wrong, and making that preference known—on a church bulletin board, of all places—does not constitute discrimination.

Would it have been better for the woman to mislead would-be roommates into believing that they would be welcome regardless of religious affiliation? Of course not. She did the right thing by making her preference known, so that non-Christians wouldn’t waste their time. And, again, the advertisement was posted in a church, not a newspaper.

Clearly, the provisions of the Fair Housing Act are not aimed at people who are seeking roommates. Every individual has the right to choose who shares their living space, and no federal or state law can legitimately force them to “integrate,” a term which appears on the FHCWM’s website with unusual frequency.

This story brings with it an opportunity to debate the proper relationship between civil rights and property rights. Would-be tenants and roommates do not have a right to live on a certain property, but the owner of the property does have a natural right to decide that they may or may not, for any reason. Civil rights activists might cry foul at this point, arguing that housing discrimination is unfair, and they would be correct. Discrimination is unfair, and so is life, but government exists only to protect our God-given rights to life, liberty, and property—not to make life fair.

If the Michigan Department of Civil Rights has any sense, it will throw the case out, and issue a stern warning to the Fair Housing Center of West Michigan to stop wasting its time with agenda-based assaults on Christians, and get back to investigating real cases of illegal housing discrimination. Unless, of course, it wants to become involved in a costly, complicated court case.
--------------
Chris Slavens is a libertarian columnist. He lives in Sussex County, Delaware. He contributes to numerous conservative sites including NetRight Daily, ARRA News Service, Conservative Voices, and his own blog, Slavens Says.

---

Tags: Chris Slavens, Michigan, Michigan Department of Civil Rights, Christian roommate, advertisement at church, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Arkansas: John Boozman Labeled True Reformer on Immigration Issues

NumbersUSA DOES NOT endorse candidates, but they do tell you who has the best immigration platform based on the information we've been able to gather. Candidates labeled as True Reformers have completed our immigration-reduction survey and agree with NumbersUSA on most of our key issues. An incumbent can earn the True Reform label if they have sponsored our "5 Great Immigration-Reduction Bills" and have a career grade of an A.

Below is the comparison between John Boozman (True Reformer) and Blanche Lincoln (definitely not a True Reformer):

---

Tags: Arkansas, US Senate, candidates, immigration, report card, John Boozman, Blanche Lincoln, NumbersUSA To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Legal or Not?

RNC for Life Report: The battle over research on embryonic stem cells, which destroys human embryos, has been an up-anddown proposition, frequently in the news in recent weeks. First came a good court ruling, then a temporary reversal of that ruling, and now the limbo of waiting for a definitive ruling on the appeal.

On September 28, 2010 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reversed the preliminary injunction issued by Chief Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. on August 23. Judge Lamberth’s ruling had halted federal funding for embryo-destructive research. The reversal decision allows federal funding of embryo destructive research to continue until the case is decided.

Two scientists working on alternatives to controversial embryonic stem cell research filed the original suit, and Judge Lamberth’s ruling determined that the Obama administration’s funding violated the Dickey-Wicker law which bars federal taxpayer dollars being spent for research using human embryonic stem cells. The National Institutes of Health, however, maintained that the Dickey-Wicker measure only applied to creating new embryos for research purposes, but that research using existing embryos was not prohibited.

The Obama administration appealed Judge Lamberth’s ruling and on September 9, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court temporarily lifted the injunction, pending further consideration. The September 28 decision means that experimentation on embryos can continue as the original lawsuit works its way through the courts.

In the meantime, your tax dollars are paying for the destruction of pre-born human embryos, and a recent Rasmussen poll showed that only about one-third of those polled approve of using tax money to fund this research. The case is expected ultimately to end up at the United States Supreme Court, and given the recent addition of ultra-liberal Justice Elena Kagan, pro-lifers have reason to be concerned about the eventual decision.

---

Tags: embrionic stem cell research, pro-life, RNC, RNC for Life, US Courts, SCOTUS To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!