It's late; below are links to some good, topical issues:
Mark Steyn -- The Obama Agenda on the Precipice
We’ll soon find out whether even Massachusetts is willing to follow him off the cliff.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTVjMTk2MjIzMjY4YTk2N2Q2MDg5MmI5MjRhMDIyY2E=
Ralph Peters -- Pentagon/Army Fort Hood Massacre Report is a Disgrace http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/hood_massacre_report_gutless_and_yaUphSPCoMs8ux4lQdtyGM
MA Senate race: Scott Brown vs. Martha Coakley
SEIU members rally for Scott Brown http://www.redmassgroup.com/diary/6658/wow-purple-shirted-seiu-members-holding-signs-at-standout
Martha Coakley calls Curt Schilling "A Yankee Fan"
Scott Brown takes lead on InTrade 53-47 http://www.intrade.com/
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Today in ObamaNation - Polls & Scott Brown
Obama's polling continues to deteriorate - no surprise there, as folks simply do not like his far left agenda.
And Scott Brown may pull off an upset for the ages in the special election for Massachussets senator - the Kennedy, er the people's seat.
Obama and America Passing Quietly in the Night [Daniel Foster]
Some of the things you can find in the new Quinnipiac poll: Large majorities favor a greater focus on security over civil liberties in U.S. anti-terror policy (63 percent to 25 percent); support the war in Afghanistan (59 percent to 35 percent); and prefer using military tribunals rather than civilian court to try suspected terrorists (59 percent to 34 percent).
One of the things you won't find: any kind of support for the Democrats' health-care reform legislation. Only 34 percent of Americans "mostly approve" of Democratic efforts on health care, while 54 percent of Americans "mostly disapprove." And for the first time, Americans trust congressional Republicans as much as the president on health-care issues (41 percent to 42 percent).
Coakley Internals Show Her at +2: 'May Be Too Far Gone' [Daniel Foster]
Independent journalist Steve Kornacki said just a week ago that Scott Brown didn't have a chance. In a post today in which he reverses course on that prediction, Kornacki has quite the juicy tidbit:
Coakley's internal poll last night, I've been told, showed her barely ahead, 46 to 44 percent. The momentum clearly favors Brown, and one very smart Massachusetts Democrat I know told me this morning that "this may be too far gone to recover."
And Scott Brown may pull off an upset for the ages in the special election for Massachussets senator - the Kennedy, er the people's seat.
Obama and America Passing Quietly in the Night [Daniel Foster]
Some of the things you can find in the new Quinnipiac poll: Large majorities favor a greater focus on security over civil liberties in U.S. anti-terror policy (63 percent to 25 percent); support the war in Afghanistan (59 percent to 35 percent); and prefer using military tribunals rather than civilian court to try suspected terrorists (59 percent to 34 percent).
One of the things you won't find: any kind of support for the Democrats' health-care reform legislation. Only 34 percent of Americans "mostly approve" of Democratic efforts on health care, while 54 percent of Americans "mostly disapprove." And for the first time, Americans trust congressional Republicans as much as the president on health-care issues (41 percent to 42 percent).
Coakley Internals Show Her at +2: 'May Be Too Far Gone' [Daniel Foster]
Independent journalist Steve Kornacki said just a week ago that Scott Brown didn't have a chance. In a post today in which he reverses course on that prediction, Kornacki has quite the juicy tidbit:
Coakley's internal poll last night, I've been told, showed her barely ahead, 46 to 44 percent. The momentum clearly favors Brown, and one very smart Massachusetts Democrat I know told me this morning that "this may be too far gone to recover."
Transparency & Obamacare
Didn't find this on C-Span:
Obama, Top Democrats, Organized Labor Spend All Day in Private Meetings Cutting Deals [Stephen Spruiell]
Unprecedented openness and transparency:
After an unusual day-long negotiating session, President Barack Obama and top Democratic congressional leaders said late Wednesday that they were making “significant progress” towards reconciling the House and Senate health care reform bills.
Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid issued a statement at the close of more than eight hours of White House talks – by far the most significant, high-level negotiations undertaken during the yearlong push for health care reform. [...]
In reality, the session at the White House was a de facto conference committee, with House and Senate leaders meeting privately to hash out differences in the bill. Pelosi and Reid have been heavily criticized by Republicans for circumventing the normal conference committee process, even though much of the work under that structure also takes place behind closed doors.
Those involved in the talks sought to keep details of their progress under wraps. The negotiations delved into the Senate’s controversial tax on expensive insurance plans, which unions and House members strongly oppose, and, for a while Wednesday, labor leaders huddled privately with top administration aides.
No question about it: Obama has changed the way Washington works. Not in Tom DeLay's wildest dreams...
Unions to be Exempted from Cadillac Tax? [Daniel Foster]
Congress Daily is reporting that union lobbyists on Capitol Hill today scored a tentative deal that would exempt "collectively bargained healthcare plans" from the so-called Cadillac Tax on high-cost policies.
As The American Spectator's Philip Klein notes, this means that two Americans receiving identical health-care benefits could be taxed differently if one happened to be a member of a union and the other not.
Update: It is easy to see why the excise tax will need a pro-union makeover before a House-Senate reconciliation. AFL-CIO and SEIU officials have spent the week hitting key Democrat offices on Capitol Hill, and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka was at the National Press Club on Monday making threats, warning Democrats that if the final version of Obamacare doesn't make organized labor happy, 2010 could be 1994 all over again, since it would be dificult to "persuade enough working Americans to go to the polls."
"A bad bill could have that kind of effect," Trumka told reporters. "People could stay home. It could suppress votes."
House Dems seem to be getting the message. Reps. Joe Courtney (D., Conn.) and Sander Levin (D., Mich.) have already rounded up more than 190 of their caucus-mates to sign a letter opposing the tax.Update II: Look for Obama and Congressional Democrats to the expand the union carve-out to cover a swath of the "middle-class" (the universal solvent of American politics), so they can camouflage this massive giveaway to a pet constituency.
One House Democrat is already saying a "consensus" could be built around such a scheme by further increasing the Medicare payroll tax and applying it to capital gains to make up for lost revenue.
This would amount to nothing less than a bill of attainder against on all constituencies that are not especially useful to the president and his party.
Obama, Top Democrats, Organized Labor Spend All Day in Private Meetings Cutting Deals [Stephen Spruiell]
Unprecedented openness and transparency:
After an unusual day-long negotiating session, President Barack Obama and top Democratic congressional leaders said late Wednesday that they were making “significant progress” towards reconciling the House and Senate health care reform bills.
Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid issued a statement at the close of more than eight hours of White House talks – by far the most significant, high-level negotiations undertaken during the yearlong push for health care reform. [...]
In reality, the session at the White House was a de facto conference committee, with House and Senate leaders meeting privately to hash out differences in the bill. Pelosi and Reid have been heavily criticized by Republicans for circumventing the normal conference committee process, even though much of the work under that structure also takes place behind closed doors.
Those involved in the talks sought to keep details of their progress under wraps. The negotiations delved into the Senate’s controversial tax on expensive insurance plans, which unions and House members strongly oppose, and, for a while Wednesday, labor leaders huddled privately with top administration aides.
No question about it: Obama has changed the way Washington works. Not in Tom DeLay's wildest dreams...
Unions to be Exempted from Cadillac Tax? [Daniel Foster]
Congress Daily is reporting that union lobbyists on Capitol Hill today scored a tentative deal that would exempt "collectively bargained healthcare plans" from the so-called Cadillac Tax on high-cost policies.
As The American Spectator's Philip Klein notes, this means that two Americans receiving identical health-care benefits could be taxed differently if one happened to be a member of a union and the other not.
Update: It is easy to see why the excise tax will need a pro-union makeover before a House-Senate reconciliation. AFL-CIO and SEIU officials have spent the week hitting key Democrat offices on Capitol Hill, and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka was at the National Press Club on Monday making threats, warning Democrats that if the final version of Obamacare doesn't make organized labor happy, 2010 could be 1994 all over again, since it would be dificult to "persuade enough working Americans to go to the polls."
"A bad bill could have that kind of effect," Trumka told reporters. "People could stay home. It could suppress votes."
House Dems seem to be getting the message. Reps. Joe Courtney (D., Conn.) and Sander Levin (D., Mich.) have already rounded up more than 190 of their caucus-mates to sign a letter opposing the tax.Update II: Look for Obama and Congressional Democrats to the expand the union carve-out to cover a swath of the "middle-class" (the universal solvent of American politics), so they can camouflage this massive giveaway to a pet constituency.
One House Democrat is already saying a "consensus" could be built around such a scheme by further increasing the Medicare payroll tax and applying it to capital gains to make up for lost revenue.
This would amount to nothing less than a bill of attainder against on all constituencies that are not especially useful to the president and his party.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Obama's falling popularity explained
Anatomy of a Meltdown [Victor Davis Hanson]
Many saw Obama's polls dropping for a variety of reasons, and can anticipate what's next. People took the candidate at his word of bipartisanship, fiscal seriousness, and centrism, and from day one got instead shady Cabinet nominations of tax cheats and lobbyists, indifference to congressional corruption as symbolized by Rangel and Dodd, a whiny monotony of "Bush did it" for a year, a 1,000-page health-care monstrosity, fiscal insanity, serial appeasement of enemies with conscious neglect of old allies, and on and on. No hope, less change.
And when the polls showed that almost the entire Obama agenda — more stimuli, more new government programs, statist health care, cap and trade to come, no gas/oil/nuclear promotion, apologetic foreign policy, "comprehensive" immigration reform as envisioned by the La Razistas — was unpopular and polling poorly, congressional Democrats, for much of the summer and fall, sighed something like, "Oh, no matter, the rock-star president's ratings are still untouchable and he can come in here and by osmosis put me over the top."
But not now. The former celebrity Obama has lost that luster, point-by-point over a year, bleeding by a thousand small cuts until he nears 40 percent approval. In themselves, the bad jokes like the flippant remark about the Special Olympics, the lunatic appointments like Anita Dunn and Van Jones, the serial untruths about airing the health-care debtae on C-SPAN or shunning lobbyists, the phony deadlines on Gitmo and the Iranians, the bribing of senators with hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayers' funds, the bowing, the snubbing of the British, the use of the race card against tea-party critics, the Skip Gates mess, the Orwellian NEA business, constant fluff photos ops, but rare real press conferences — all that in the aggregate brought Obama to his present state.
And now the question is not whether the president's charisma can save his unpopular agenda, but rather whether the president's growing unpopularity makes things even worse. This takes place, of course, in a landscape of 10 percent unemployment, a nearly $2 trillion debt, and rising energy prices. Somehow more deficits and subsidized wind and solar won't be winning issues.
An obvious prediction: The upcoming show trial of KSM, cap and trade, and amnesty are not winning issues — and will have to be Gitmoized or they will threaten to destroy the Democratic party for years.
Finally, how ironic — Obama was elected as a reaction to Bush's mistakes of deficit spending and big-ticket new entitlements that nullified his otherwise effective anti-terrorism war; instead, he took what people liked about Bush and ridiculed them, while trumping Bush's spending that had turned so many off.
Many saw Obama's polls dropping for a variety of reasons, and can anticipate what's next. People took the candidate at his word of bipartisanship, fiscal seriousness, and centrism, and from day one got instead shady Cabinet nominations of tax cheats and lobbyists, indifference to congressional corruption as symbolized by Rangel and Dodd, a whiny monotony of "Bush did it" for a year, a 1,000-page health-care monstrosity, fiscal insanity, serial appeasement of enemies with conscious neglect of old allies, and on and on. No hope, less change.
And when the polls showed that almost the entire Obama agenda — more stimuli, more new government programs, statist health care, cap and trade to come, no gas/oil/nuclear promotion, apologetic foreign policy, "comprehensive" immigration reform as envisioned by the La Razistas — was unpopular and polling poorly, congressional Democrats, for much of the summer and fall, sighed something like, "Oh, no matter, the rock-star president's ratings are still untouchable and he can come in here and by osmosis put me over the top."
But not now. The former celebrity Obama has lost that luster, point-by-point over a year, bleeding by a thousand small cuts until he nears 40 percent approval. In themselves, the bad jokes like the flippant remark about the Special Olympics, the lunatic appointments like Anita Dunn and Van Jones, the serial untruths about airing the health-care debtae on C-SPAN or shunning lobbyists, the phony deadlines on Gitmo and the Iranians, the bribing of senators with hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayers' funds, the bowing, the snubbing of the British, the use of the race card against tea-party critics, the Skip Gates mess, the Orwellian NEA business, constant fluff photos ops, but rare real press conferences — all that in the aggregate brought Obama to his present state.
And now the question is not whether the president's charisma can save his unpopular agenda, but rather whether the president's growing unpopularity makes things even worse. This takes place, of course, in a landscape of 10 percent unemployment, a nearly $2 trillion debt, and rising energy prices. Somehow more deficits and subsidized wind and solar won't be winning issues.
An obvious prediction: The upcoming show trial of KSM, cap and trade, and amnesty are not winning issues — and will have to be Gitmoized or they will threaten to destroy the Democratic party for years.
Finally, how ironic — Obama was elected as a reaction to Bush's mistakes of deficit spending and big-ticket new entitlements that nullified his otherwise effective anti-terrorism war; instead, he took what people liked about Bush and ridiculed them, while trumping Bush's spending that had turned so many off.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
The Senate Race in Massachusetts
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MmFhZmVhZDZiNmI1YmI5N2VlZmM1OWRkMzA2ZWI3MmQ=
Gergen: Brown 'Stuffed Me' With His Kennedy-Seat Quip [Robert Costa]
In Monday night’s senatorial debate in Massachusetts, David Gergen, the moderator, looked straight at Scott Brown, the Republican nominee, and asked him this question:
GERGEN: You said you’re for health-care reform, just not this bill. We know from the Clinton experience that if this bill fails, it could well be another 15 years before we see health-care reform efforts in Washington. Are you willing under those circumstances to say, I’m going to be the person, I’m going to sit in Teddy Kennedy’s seat and I’m going to be the person who’s going to block it for another 15 years?
Brown, in what I call his ‘Nashua moment,’ responded with what’s become the remark that’s defining this race:
BROWN: Well, with all due respect, it’s not the Kennedys’ seat, and it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it’s the people’s seat. And they have the chance to send somebody down there who is an independent voter, and an independent thinker, and going to look out for the best interests of the people of Massachusetts. And the way that this bill is configured, I’d like to send it back to the drawing board because I believe people should have insurance — [just not] this particular bill because it’s not good for the entire country.
In a conversation with National Review Online today, Gergen, a noted White House adviser to four presidents and professor of public service at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, admitted, with good humor, that Brown smoked him with his sharp retort. “He stuffed me on that,” said Gergen. “Scott Brown gave a very good impression of who he was and what he stood for. He was fast on his feet.”
Gergen added that the importance of the Kennedy legacy in this race is quickly fading. “While he remains a beloved figure, especially to Massachusetts Democrats, he’s certainly not at the center of the dynamics shaping this race. This campaign has become much more of a referendum on Washington . . . That’s the real issue here. The trend lines in Washington on issues such as health care could be souring the moods not only of conservatives, moderate Republicans, and right-leaning independents, but spreading into the views of both left-leaning independents and Democrats themselves.”
Still, Gergen said that Democrat Martha Coakley “has to be considered the frontrunner at this point.” While Brown was strong during last night’s debate, Gergen said that Coakley came across “as more accessible as a person.” Plus, he believes that many Massachusetts Democrats, though unhappy with Coakley and Washington, will ultimately decide to vote for her over Brown next week because “they want to show their frustration, but they aren’t willing or ready, yet, to send a Republican to the Senate.” Gergen also noted that he’s still “as puzzled by the polls as everyone else, and just as fascinated by how this race is playing out.”
Gergen: Brown 'Stuffed Me' With His Kennedy-Seat Quip [Robert Costa]
In Monday night’s senatorial debate in Massachusetts, David Gergen, the moderator, looked straight at Scott Brown, the Republican nominee, and asked him this question:
GERGEN: You said you’re for health-care reform, just not this bill. We know from the Clinton experience that if this bill fails, it could well be another 15 years before we see health-care reform efforts in Washington. Are you willing under those circumstances to say, I’m going to be the person, I’m going to sit in Teddy Kennedy’s seat and I’m going to be the person who’s going to block it for another 15 years?
Brown, in what I call his ‘Nashua moment,’ responded with what’s become the remark that’s defining this race:
BROWN: Well, with all due respect, it’s not the Kennedys’ seat, and it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it’s the people’s seat. And they have the chance to send somebody down there who is an independent voter, and an independent thinker, and going to look out for the best interests of the people of Massachusetts. And the way that this bill is configured, I’d like to send it back to the drawing board because I believe people should have insurance — [just not] this particular bill because it’s not good for the entire country.
In a conversation with National Review Online today, Gergen, a noted White House adviser to four presidents and professor of public service at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, admitted, with good humor, that Brown smoked him with his sharp retort. “He stuffed me on that,” said Gergen. “Scott Brown gave a very good impression of who he was and what he stood for. He was fast on his feet.”
Gergen added that the importance of the Kennedy legacy in this race is quickly fading. “While he remains a beloved figure, especially to Massachusetts Democrats, he’s certainly not at the center of the dynamics shaping this race. This campaign has become much more of a referendum on Washington . . . That’s the real issue here. The trend lines in Washington on issues such as health care could be souring the moods not only of conservatives, moderate Republicans, and right-leaning independents, but spreading into the views of both left-leaning independents and Democrats themselves.”
Still, Gergen said that Democrat Martha Coakley “has to be considered the frontrunner at this point.” While Brown was strong during last night’s debate, Gergen said that Coakley came across “as more accessible as a person.” Plus, he believes that many Massachusetts Democrats, though unhappy with Coakley and Washington, will ultimately decide to vote for her over Brown next week because “they want to show their frustration, but they aren’t willing or ready, yet, to send a Republican to the Senate.” Gergen also noted that he’s still “as puzzled by the polls as everyone else, and just as fascinated by how this race is playing out.”
Monday, January 11, 2010
Explaining Racist fool Sen. Harry Reid
In case you were confused as to why Obama & other Democrats are "supporting" and "forgiving" this idiot, This chart will explain all !
Sunday, January 10, 2010
State of the States: "Broke & Going Broker"
Just another thing to look forward to in ObamaNation:
State Fiscal Nightmares [Jack Fowler]
Over at www.watchdog.org Frank Keegan answers the question "what is the state of the states?" — it's "broke and going broker."
Taxpayers, prepare to be extorted and robbed.
If the first two state-of-the-state speeches Wednesday are any indication, we are in for it.
Fiscal mismanagement leaders California and New York opened the hunting season on taxpayers.
Forty three other state legislatures convene soon to deal with the fiscal carnage they wrought through political profligacy and false promises to dedicated state workers during recent bubble years.
As of December, the National Conference of State Legislatures fiscal survey found: “Thirty-six states already report another round of gaps since FY 2010 began. The total now hit $28.2 billion, and the fiscal year for most states doesn’t end until June.” They already are in the hole despite raising taxes, cutting spending, squandering “rainy day” funds and using federal debt and accounting tricks to close $146 billion in cumulative budget gaps.
Those shortfalls pale against the lurid reality of unfunded promises to retirees, deferred public works projects and years of accounting tricks hiding true deficits.
Compounding all that is the fact that $248 billion in federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds stop Dec. 31, halfway through most states’ fiscal years.
And, according to the National Governor’s Association “Fiscal Survey of States” released last week, “the $87 billion in Medicaid funds and the $48 billion in state stabilization funds … allowed states to offset planned budget cuts and tax increases,” meaning that’s another $135 billion they are going to have to take from somebody next year.
Read Keegan's complete story here.
State Fiscal Nightmares [Jack Fowler]
Over at www.watchdog.org Frank Keegan answers the question "what is the state of the states?" — it's "broke and going broker."
Taxpayers, prepare to be extorted and robbed.
If the first two state-of-the-state speeches Wednesday are any indication, we are in for it.
Fiscal mismanagement leaders California and New York opened the hunting season on taxpayers.
Forty three other state legislatures convene soon to deal with the fiscal carnage they wrought through political profligacy and false promises to dedicated state workers during recent bubble years.
As of December, the National Conference of State Legislatures fiscal survey found: “Thirty-six states already report another round of gaps since FY 2010 began. The total now hit $28.2 billion, and the fiscal year for most states doesn’t end until June.” They already are in the hole despite raising taxes, cutting spending, squandering “rainy day” funds and using federal debt and accounting tricks to close $146 billion in cumulative budget gaps.
Those shortfalls pale against the lurid reality of unfunded promises to retirees, deferred public works projects and years of accounting tricks hiding true deficits.
Compounding all that is the fact that $248 billion in federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds stop Dec. 31, halfway through most states’ fiscal years.
And, according to the National Governor’s Association “Fiscal Survey of States” released last week, “the $87 billion in Medicaid funds and the $48 billion in state stabilization funds … allowed states to offset planned budget cuts and tax increases,” meaning that’s another $135 billion they are going to have to take from somebody next year.
Read Keegan's complete story here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
