Tag Archives: Republicans

US Senate Should Abolish the 60 Vote Cloture/Filibuster Rules

Senate Filibuster and Cloture Vote Rules = Tyranny of the Minority!

The Senate’s use of a filibuster or the cloture vote to stop a filibuster, IS NOT IN THE US CONSTITUTION!  It is simply a Senate “rule” that was created by the Senate itself.  

Most US Citizens believe that a majority vote in the House or Senate should be the standard for passing legislation. 

They believe that

THE RULE OF THE MAJORITY

in a democracy should be the guiding principle. 

NOT A RULE BY THE MINORITY!

Did you know that the word “filibuster” comes from a Dutch word meaning PIRATE?

Why should a minority of Senators be able to thwart the “WILL OF THE PEOPLE”?  When the people elect a majority of Senators from one political party or ideology, the people expect that the elected majority in the Senate should prevail over the minority.  IF you believe that the minority’s rights are greater than the majority’s rights then should the passing of any legislation by the Senate be approved by 100%, 99%, 90%, 75%, 66% of the senators?  In essence, the current Senate Rule 22 requiring 60 votes to close debate puts control of the Senate in the minority, not the elected majority on regular legislation.

Historical Perspective:

The Senate rule allowing for a filibuster was first adopted by the Senate in 1806 but first used later in 1837.   In 1917, the Senate adopted a rule, (Rule 22), that provided that a filibuster could be stopped by a vote of 2/3rds of the Senate.  The 2/3rds vote requirement remained until 1975. 

During this period, the Southern Democrat Senators used the high 2/3rds vote threshold to block the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including anti-lynching legislation,  until cloture was finally invoked after a 60 day filibuster. 

In 1975, the Senate modified its cloture rule allowing for a vote of 3/5ths (60 votes) to stop a filibuster.   In 2013 the Senate changed the cloture vote to a simple majority for non SCOTUS judicial appointments. Then, in 2017, the rules were changed for even SCOTUS appointments.

Voting in the Senate should be the same as in the House of Representatives where the simple majority vote carries the issue.

Hiding Behind Senate Rules:

The other obscenity that is created with the phony 60 vote majority to end debate and pass the legislation is when the party who controls lets say 52 votes puts a bill on the floor knowing full well that the minority will block cloture and force the bill to die without a vote.  Then those in the majority strut about saying well we tried by XYZ minority blocked us. 

In more concrete terms, Obamacare repeal votes took place countless times when the Republicans knew full well that the legislation would be blocked by the Senate or Obama.  House Speaker Paul Ryan also hides behind Senate Rules when he re-crafted the Obamacare Repeal and Replace blaming Senate Rules as the reason he had to water down and stage the replacement. 

Democrat Vs Republican:

Republicans wring their hands when us regular folks tell them to do away with the 60 vote cloture rule and vote up or down on everything based solely on a simple majority.  Leadership says that when Democrats are in power they will use this power against Republican and ram legislation through.  

Obama taught us that these insane legislative rules with their false majorities are inconsequential and should be predicated on a simple majority vote.  When Obama lost the majority in the House and Senate, he merely ignored the legislative and judicial branches and ruled by fiat.   If the Republicans did pass a bill, they knew Obama would veto it! 

So, it did not matter what the Republican majority was in the Senate or the House.  Both parties use these rules to hide behind.  The use of these faux votes to prove to their constituencies that they are fighting for them is ludicrous.  We are not THAT dumb!

McConnell:

Do Away with Senate Rule 22 Requiring 60 Votes to Close a Debate;

Man-up; and Vote and Be Accountable!

We The People are Not Fooled!

RD Pierini

@RDPierini

 

 

Advertisements

Ryan Vs Trump-Career Politician Vs Businessman

Who Understands the Real World Better?

Trump Ryan borderRyan was the Primary Sponsor of Only 2 Pieces of Legislation in 17 Years!

One to Name a Post Office in His Home Town

Two, to put an Excise Tax on ARROWS

Trump built a $10 Billion International Real Estate Company

The DC, self-proclaimed conservative pundits hail Ryan as a principled conservative and rail against Trump as a non-conservative populist. 

They glow over Ryan’s budget prowess and his creds as a “policy wonk”, while they spew hatred for Trump’s uncouth dispatch of his 2016 rivals and scoff at his lack of intelligence in being able to articulate policy positions. 

The DC, Self-proclaimed Conservative Pundits are the Enablers that Allowed This Country to Sink Into Economic, Political and Moral Decline

They have Covered for our Feckless Republican Leadership and Excused the Progressive Agenda as an Unavoidable US Political Evolution

We The People Cannot Distinguish and Difference between Our Current Republican and Democrat Leadership

Ryan PelosiRyan and the Republican Insiders have stood by for the past 24 years and have allowed or helped the left to drive this country into near oblivion:

  • Created the depression of 2008 by setting up the prime loan perfect storm then nationalizing our banking system

  • Created an unthinkable level of national debt even when in total control of the Government

  • Created conditions that have driven our military unpreparedness to levels not seen since before WWII

  • Created a stagnated economy while spending over $4 Trillion per year 

  • Created an ineffective and systemic corruption of our educational system

  • Created a trade paradigm that has exported 40% + of our manufacturing jobs and industries, and allowed our healthcare system to be decimated and much, much more. 

  • Created a system of environmental, labor, other regulations that cripple and kill our own industries while putting our international competitors at a competitive advantage.

So, if Ryan and the Republican Insiders are “Pure Conservatives” with “Principled Positions”, what on earth are their positions?

  • Support for nationalized, centralized banking system?

  • Support for uncontrolled spending and debt accumulation?

  • Support for weakening our military so we are unable to defend our nation?

  • Support for driving our economy down, holding down our middle class incomes, driving more and more citizens into poverty and big government hand out programs?

  • Support for dumbing down our educational system while increasing our cost per student and enriching the Teacher’s Unions?

  • Support for promoting “unbalanced” “free trade” programs that serve to drive our industries overseas and drive our citizens into unemployment?

  • Support for Big Government regulations to drive industries out of the US and enhance the capabilities of our competitors.

I am not the problem, It is the Pigs in Government
I am not the problem, It is the Pigs in Government

It is obvious to We the People that Politicians are only focused on their own re-election and increasing the power of the federal government and thus their own personal power. 

It is time for us to go back to our Founding Father’s Principles, not Republican or Democrat, and have a President, and ultimately a Congress, made up of Business People and not professional politicians, like Ryan and others, who have never ran a business nor even had a job, other than being a lawyer, in the real world.  We need more people in government who have signed the front of paychecks rather than just the back of a government check!  We need a government who lives among We the People and understand what We the People are going through every day. 

Ryan and the Insider Professional Political class will never come up with solutions that really work.  They simply do not have the experience and they are motivated more to perpetuate their own kingdoms than take care of We the People.  Business men and women are confronted with issues and problems every day.  They have to act quickly and in a cost-effective manner or they perish. 

What is the Punishment for Inept or Corrupt Politicians? 

BIG FAT PENSIONS AND A GOLDEN PARACHUTE WITH LOBBYING ORGANIZATIONS AND DC POWER BROKERS.

 

Why Trump Does Not Need Ryan’s Endorsement

We the People, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents support Trump and his vision, and not those of the DC Establishment.  Votes Count, eventually.  We will get enough people in Congress who are from the real world, and care more about this country than themselves and who will follow Trump’s example.  The DC Establishment has decimated our Constitution and the enumeration of powers.  We need to get the power back to the States where it started and cut DC down to size. 

This is not the Hunger Games even though DC resembles “Panem” and Obama, President Snow and Congress His Puppets! 

Ryan does not control nor speak for We the People

Get over it!

RD Pierini

@RDPierini

 

Trump Will Win the Muslim Ban Argument, Again!

 ***Update ***

Told Ya–64% of Likely GOP primary voters agree with Trump’s Ban on Muslim Immigration!!!

An Online Poll Found 37% of General Election Voters (includes Democrats) Favored Trump’s Proposal

It is comical to see the left and right come together every time Trump issues a fatwā, فتوى‎ (just trying to keep things in context).  This time Trump merely wants to suspend the entry into the United States anyone, other than US citizens, (Unless they went overseas to receive Jihadi training), who is a Muslim.  The both sides are screaming Un-American, Fascists, Racists, unconstitutional, and a whole host of other superlatives and rhetorical hyperbole.  It is always amusing when Dick Chaney ends up seated next to the current White House in condemning Trump’s proposals.  Maybe when that happens, someone should call for a time out and revisit the proposal.

Trump Gets the Juices Flowing!

Whether you support Trump or not, you have to admit that he really knows how to create a discussion on whatever topic he deems critical to open debate.  He does not put a fine edge on any of his points nor does he hide behind and PC rhetoric.  He plainly stated: “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” 

  • Is this constitutional? Yes, non citizens have no protections under our Constitution.
  • Would the President have statutory authority to enforce such a ban?  Yes!  8 USC 1182: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”)

Here are a couple of examples of restrictions placed on immigration by our government in the past:

  • 1882Chinese Exclusion Act. First federal immigration law suspended Chinese immigration for 10 years and barred Chinese in U.S. from citizenship. Also barred convicts, lunatics, and others unable to care for themselves from entering. Head tax placed on immigrants.
  • 1891: Bureau of Immigration established under the Treasury Department. More classes of aliens restricted including those who were monetarily assisted by others for their passage. Steamship companies were ordered to return ineligible immigrants to countries of origin.
  • 1892Ellis Island opened to screen immigrants entering on east coast. (Angel Island screened those on west coast.) Ellis Island officials reported that women traveling alone must be met by a man, or they were immediately deported. (Hillary would love this one)
  • 1902:  Chinese Exclusion Act renewed indefinitely.  (See 1882 above)
  • 1906:  Procedural safeguards enacted for naturalization. Knowledge of English becomes a basic requirement.  (Just thought I would add this one)
  • 1917:  Immigration Act provided for literacy tests for those over 16 and established an “Asiatic Barred Zone,” which barred all immigrants from Asia.
  • 1922 Japanese made ineligible for citizenship. (This was 19 years before Pearl Harbor attack by the Japanese)
  • 1924:  1921 Quotas changed to 2% of each nationality based on numbers in US in 1890. Based on surnames (many anglicized at Ellis Island) and not the census figures, 82% of all immigrants allowed in the country came from western and northern Europe, 16% from southern and eastern Europe, 2% from the rest of the world. As no distinctions were made between refugees and immigrants, this limited Jewish emigres during 1930s and 40s.
  • 1948:  (And here is another of those Un-American concepts)  Displaced Persons Act allowed 205,000 refugees over two years; gave priority to Baltic States refugees; admitted as quota immigrants. Technical provisions discriminated against Catholics and Jews; those were dropped in 1953, and 205,000 refugees were accepted as non-quota immigrants.
  • 2001Patriot Act:  Amended the Immigration and Nationality Act to broaden the scope of aliens ineligible for admission or deportable due to terrorist activities to include an alien who: (1) is a representative of a political, social, or similar group whose political endorsement of terrorist acts undermines U.S. antiterrorist efforts; (2) has used a position of prominence to endorse terrorist activity, or to persuade others to support such activity in a way that undermines U.S. antiterrorist efforts (or the child or spouse of such an alien under specified circumstances); or (3) has been associated with a terrorist organization and intends to engage in threatening activities while in the United States.

So, apparently, we have been Un-American, Fascists, Racists, and constitutionally incorrect in the past!  We have banned whole nationalities and indeed races, and stopped a group of Catholics via regulations, etc.

Why was and is all of this legal?  Because our Constitution places the protection of our citizens as the primary duty of our government and any immigration or refugee restrictions the Congress and President deem necessary to protect the nation is not only Constitutional but required by those in our government.

Can and should followers of Islam be set up as a restricted class for immigration scrutiny?  Yes.

Islam is not only a religion, but also establishes a code of laws for its adherents to live by commonly known as Sharia Law.  When polled by the Center for Justice, 51% of the followers of Islam who are living in the U.S. believed that they should be able to choose to live by U.S. laws or Sharia Law.

So, before you succumb to the hyperbole of the media and other Democrat and Republican political types, stop and ask yourself, “if 2 out of a 1000 Muslim immigrants are or will become radicalized while in the US, should our government do more to screen out the 2?”  Unfortunately the number is a lot highter than 2 out of 1000 which is only .2%.

The Center for Security Policy also released their online polling data that showed that “25% of those polled (Muslims living now in the U.S.), agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad.”

So, rather than 2 out of 1,000, would you feel comfortable with 250 out of 1000 becoming radicalized and perpetrating another Paris or San Bernardino style attack or worse?

Just Sayin!  Worth thinking about what Trump said and asking yourself what should we do to keep out elements who wish to destroy this nation?

 

 

 

Hat Tip:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/08/trumps-muslim-ban-not-fascist-not-unconstitutional/

http://www.nationalreview.com/donald-trump-muslim-immigration

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

http://www.flowofhistory.org/themes/movement_settlement/uspolicytimeline.php

Update:

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/poll-voters-agree-poll/2015/12/09/id/705164/

Obama Stimulus II–The Sequel Is as Bad as the Original–Obama Versus JFK

Who will be judged the best Democratic President,

John F. Kennedy or Barack Hussein Obama II

My money is on JFK!  JFK understood the economics of taxation and revenues, and the economics of taxation and economic growth.  Obama is absolutely clueless as he clenches even tighter to his absolute devotion to Keynesian economics principles that have been proven time and time again and have failed every time they have been tried.

  • Obama’s Stimulus II is Proposing to raise taxes $467 Billion to pay for his Payback to Unions Plan by:
    • Raising the Taxes on those making over $200K per year, $250,000 for joint filers, including small business persons. ($424 Billion over 10 years)
    • Raising taxes on Oil Companies that the Oil Company will have to pass through to you every time you buy gasoline.  ($40 Billion over 10 years)
    • Raising taxes on manufacturers of Corporate Aircraft that will reduce their ability to rapidly depreciate certain business purchases.  This will increase the cost of their aircraft and drive demand, and jobs, down in this industry. ($3 billion over 10 years)

What did JFK Say about the impact of LOWERING, NOT RAISING taxes on the Economy?

Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 17, 1963, annual budget message to the Congress, fiscal year 1964

What did JFK Say about the impact of LOWERING, NOT RAISING taxes on the Federal Revenues?

“It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now … Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.”

– John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, president’s news conference

What did JFK say about a the BEST WAY TO REDUCE Deficits?

“In today’s economy, fiscal prudence and responsibility call for tax reduction even if it temporarily enlarges the federal deficit – why reducing taxes is the best way open to us to increase revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: “The Economic Report Of The President”

What would be JFK’s advice to Obama today?

“It is no contradiction – the most important single thing we can do to stimulate investment in today’s economy is to raise consumption by major reduction of individual income tax rates.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: “The Economic Report Of The President”

It is sad that the American electorate was duped into voting for a President who did not have any experience in the private sector nor any real life business experience.  His textbook based, Keynesian economic philosophy has been historically proven wrong time and time again.  But, Keynesian economics promotes the Progressive Left’s agenda to create a Statist Society, so his is committed to it body and soul.  Even the words and stature of one of his supposed heroes, President John F. Kennedy, could not make Obama change his mind and start down a path to save this country.  JFK got it, Obama will never get it…

 The goals of Stimulus II are the same as Stimulus I:

  1. Transfer Money to Union Employees in order to increase Union contributions back to the Obama relection campaign.

  2. Transfer Money to Unions to make sure the Union infrastructure has the resources it needs to infect the 2012 election, tax-free!

  3. Save public sector jobs, teachers, firemen, and policemen in lieu of stimulating the private sector who eventually have to pay the salaries of these same teachers, firemen and policemen.

  4. Create AFL-CIO construction jobs for more “Shovel Ready” jobs.  This is another union payoff insure the Union/Democrats’ money laundering scheme is well oiled.

  5. KILL SOCIAL SECURITY:  Obama is lowering FICA taxes paid by employers and employers at a time when EVERYONE IN WASHINGTON is saying that SOCIAL SECURITY IS GOING BROKE!!!

  6. More Green Job Waste like the half a billion dollar boondoggle to Solyndra!

 

Call for Good Governance:

The Congress, Democrats and Republicans better step up and do the right thing rather than support another failure by this man-child President.

  • Eliminate Capital Gains.
  • Cut Corporate Tax Rates by 50%.
  • Cut Personal Income Tax Rates by 30%.
  • Work on Tax Reform to establish a flat tax with no loopholes, special deals to General Electric, etc…
  • Cut Business Regulations back to 2000 levels.
  • Open up all energy exploration.
  • Create a Balanced Budget Amendment and get it to the States for Ratification.
  • Create a new Federal Budget paradigm:
    • Federal Budgets do not include automatic 7-8% increases.  Every year the budget starts at the prior year level and spending or cut justifications start on that base.
    • Federal Budget is pegged at 2009 levels and then reduced by 1% per year until it is 15% or less of our GDP.
  • Enact Tort reform were liability limits on lawsuits are established, including punitive damages.  No law suits can be pursued on drug companies on drugs that have been approved by the FDA.  If not, what is the point of the FDA process?  End Class Action Lawsuits or limit the legal fees to a fair hourly billing plus expenses. 

This is not rocket science.  JFK got it!  Why can’t someone in Washington get through to the President that he will not only be a one term wonder but go down as the single largest failure of our great Republic.  My money is on Obama sticking to his failed Ideology!  Ignorance is bliss and he is very “BLISS FULL”.

RD Pierini

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?article_id=39517#ixzz1Xma9lyP8

 http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2011/sep/12/fully-paid-just-not-yet/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904353504576566802250477510.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

Hobbits Vs Republican Party – Liberals Should be Salivating

It has been roughly 9 months since the 2010 election that swept 65 new Republicans into the House and most of these were either directly associated to the Tea Party movement or had pledged to adhere to the basic Tea Party tenants.  You would think that the Republican Leadership would have put a plan together to assimilate the Tea Party beliefs into their legislative plans.  Obviously this never happened!

Lewis Caroll aptly stated in “Through the Looking Glass”,

“If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you there!”

This phrase aptly describes the Republican Party and their strategy to defeat Progressivism in the United States.  (I am really trying to give the R’s the benefit of the doubt in believing that they want to defeat Progressivism!)  The Republican Leadership had been in a knee-jerk mode versus the democrats ever since the mid-term election.  They have no real legislative agenda, past show votes for defeating Obamacare and their half-hearted support Cut, Cap, and Balance.  They did not even really get behind the Ryan Budget but left Ryan hanging out to fend for himself.  Letting Ryan attend an Obama speaking event shows that the Republicans clearly do not understand their opponent.  

The Tea Party Movement in 2010 gave the Republican Party a windfall of support that proved effective in the 2010 Mid Term Election.  The Republican Leaders thought they could control the new Tea Party members of the House and Senate using their old “politics as usual” tactics such a giving the new members a seat on a committee or even a chairmanship or offering them earmarks for their District/State.  I guess the leadership forgot that part of the Tea Party mantra was NO MORE EARMARKS.  Oh well, maybe bribing them with committees or chairperson seats.  What the leaders forgot as well was that the new Tea Party Members owed their election allegiance to the Tea Party (i.e. their constituents back home), and NOT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. 

Why do they feel more allegiance to the Tea Party rather than the Republican Party?  Maybe it is because they witnessed what the Republican Party did to Tea Party candidates who beat out their Republican sponsored opponents in primaries.  Remember Sharon Angle or Christine O’Donnell?  Or, once the Tea Party candidate won the primary, it was like pulling teeth to get any financial or organization support from the State or National Republican Party organizations in spite of the fact that these candidates were running under the Republican banner…

Then along came the Debt and Debt Ceiling Crisis.  REALLY?  You did not know that Obama and you were spending your way to pushing through the $14.5 Trillion Debt Ceiling in August or September?  REALLY?  If you are trying to win a legislative battle you go on the offensive, legislatively and in the public arena.  You controlled the House of Representatives and you are facing a Democratic Senate where 28 of their member are up for re-election in 2012 and are scared to death of facing the Tea Party opposition in their home states.  You are facing a very inexperienced, petulant President who is an ideologue but cannot win any logical argument with the American People IF YOU ARGUE WITH HIM IN THE ARENA OF PUBLIC OPINION.  To do this, you must have an aggressive offensive plan that you commit to and execute without hesitation. 

Then insider Republican after insider Republican got in front of any camera they could find and eventually blamed the “Conservatives”, read to mean Tea Party Members, made the whole negotiation with the Democrats harder than it should have been.  What negotiation?  You pass Cut, Cap and Balance, then the weasel leader of the Senate Harry Reid goes in front of a Camera and says the bill is dead on arrival in the Senate and the Idealogue-In-Chief goes on the air and says he will Veto the CCB bill.  So, what did you do?  You folded up your tent and went back and negotiated with yourself.  GOOD PLAN!  The final result being giving Obama his Debt Limit cover through the next election cycle and only cutting $21 Billion from the 2012 budget, maybe.  Then you set up a commission to deal with the real tough issues but you put triggers in the deal that if this commission cannot reach an agreement, the MILITARY BUDGET GETS CREAMED!  REALLY?  But you say there will be no new tax increases because you will stand up against any tax increases.  REALLY?  Which of you brave souls are going to take a chance on decimating the military for your Principles of not Raising TaxesHow are you going to fight Obama and the Senate on not allowing the Bush Tax cuts to expire?  What is your plan? You don’t think Obama and Reid won’t leverage those tax increases to get whatever they want out of you?

Congratulations Republican Leadership.  You have positioned us into certain legislative defeat by 1/1/2012 and given all of the advantages to the Democrats.  If that was your plan in the first place, I take back my earlier assertion that you “did know where you were going so any road wouldn’t have taken you there”.  Maybe you did know where you were going…

Today, thanks to you and your lack of leadership, we now have a national debt that exceeds our GDP!

RD Pierini

 http://news.yahoo.com/us-aaa-rating-still-under-threat-204040123.html

Gingrich Comes out of the Progressive Close

For my friends who I have been telling that the former Speaker Gingrich is not a conservative, listen to his own words from yesterday’s talk shows.

  • Slamming Paul Ryan’s, Tea Party Supported 2012 Budget, Gingrich called Ryan’s plans to save Medicare as social engineering: “I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering.”
  • Regarding Obamacare’s MANDATORY HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE, Gingrich stated that he supports mandatory health care coverage mandated at the State level.

If there were any doubts that Newt was never a true conservative, this is proof beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Medicare/Paul Ryan’s 2012 Budget/Social Engineering:

Medicare was established when the Social Security Act of 1965 was signed into law on July 30, 1965, by President Lyndon B. Johnson.  THIS WAS THE SOCIAL ENGINEERING LAW ENACTED BY PROGRESSIVES as part of Johnson’s Great Society.  The progressives outnumbered the Republicans in Congress 2:1 so there was no serious opposition.  Today, Medicare/Medicaid equals almost 5% of our GDP.  This is expected to explode to almost 20% by 2084.  THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE SOCIAL SECURITY.  Johnson’s Great Society was the epitome of Social Engineering as it removed the burden of healthcare, ostensibly, from senior citizens and forced them into a national senior’s healthcare system.  Participation in Medicare by Seniors IS NOT OPTIONAL AND IS MANDATORY.  Think not, try to opt out.  Obama and Holder are fighting a lawsuit brought by 3 seniors in October of 2009, who wanted to opt out of Medicare. 

In 1964, Johnson changed the healthcare landscape forever in a massive social engineering scheme.  This law has allowed the Federal Government to set provider reimbursement rates, “regulate” pharmaceutical prices, and set healthcare standards.  In short, it took over healthcare for over 15% of today’s US Citizens.  It also gave the government a chokehold on our healthcare deliver system that has seen its costs spiral out of sight since Medicare and Medicaid was started.

Paul Ryan is trying to reverse some of the negative impacts of this failed social experiment.  Doing nothing is no longer an option.  Bush tried unsuccessfully to get a Republican Congress to deal with the pending bankruptcy of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.  These programs are now insolvent and a serious approach is needed by a serious government.  All Ryan is trying to do is come up with a funding mechanism that will save these programs and ensure that future seniors are not without healthcare.  Current recipients are not touched whatsoever by the Ryan Budget.  So where is the social engineering? 

So, Newt is basically saying that the social engineering caused by the Great Society is good but trying to keep its programs solvent is bad social engineering. 

Newt’s Support of Mandatory Healthcare Coverage:

There is not a single conservative principle that could justify Newt’s position on mandatory healthcare, whether imposed by States or by the Federal Government.  This is the antithesis of liberty and merely a sham to allow the Government to control lifestyles, health choices, and healthcare providers.  He cites auto insurance that is mandatory in most states in order to register a vehicle and obtain a driver’s license.  How’s that working out for you when you are in an auto accident by an illegal alien with a fake drivers license or an illegal alien who has obtained a driver’s license with fake insurance coverage documents.  What happens is that only law-abiding citizens have insurance and we are still at the mercy of those who do not have insurance.  BESIDES, WHO TRULY BELIEVES THAT THE STATE GOVERNMENTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO FORCE US TO BUY AUTO INSURANCE…? 

So, Newt uses one non conservative mandate, mandatory auto insurance, to justify another non conservative mandate, mandatory healthcare insurance.  Newt, how is mandatory healthcare working out in Massachusetts?  We know mandatory auto insurance is a farce. 

The only good news is that maybe this will eliminate Newt as a Republican candidate forever.  Maybe this will keep him off of Hannity.  Maybe, we can get real conservative candidates, who stake their conservatism on principle, to run against Obama.  Obama is already changing his rhetoric to sound conservative as he did in 2008.  This is a farce and we all should know this by know.  What we don’t need is another McCain to run as a Rhino and kill our chances to take back the White House.  

Pawlenty and Daniels are not the final Republican candidates, I hope.   We need to support real, tried and true, conservatives to put their hat in the ring.  Right now Bolton, Palin, and Bachman are the only ones on the side lines that could run a true conservatives.  Maybe there are others but given the animus of the left against these three, these three must be the best candidates… 

 RD Pierini

http://www.heartland.org/publications/health%20care/article/24314/Senior_Citizens_Press_Demand_to_Opt_Out_of_Medicare_Retain_Social_Security_Benefit.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Medicare_and_Medicaid_GDP_Chart.svg

http://www.heartland.org/publications/health%20care/article/24314/Senior_Citizens_Press_Demand_to_Opt_Out_of_Medicare_Retain_Social_Security_Benefit.html

Libya Redux-Where is the Commander-In-Chief–Where is the Media

Here are a few of the headlines today that you probably won’t see in the Obama Media since they are preoccupied with blaming the Republicans for the Government shutdown.

Here are two that you may want to ponder first:

No Death Benefits for Military During Shutdown

Military Sends Out Half-Pay Notice to War Zone Troops

 

Libya:

  • MESS: Botched NATO bomb raid leaves 13 Libyan rebels dead…  (We killed those who we were protecting!)
  • ‘We didn’t know they had tanks’…  (DUH, who is in charge?  Great intelligence!  What happened to the CIA who were on the ground?)
  • Up to the job? NATO criticized over Libya campaign  (YA Think!  If this was GW, he would have been tarred and feathered)
  • Rebels paint roof vehicles bright pink to avoid friendly fire...  (Good Idea! Now maybe Code Pink will Like this War and you won’t get killed by NATO!)
  • General Carter Ham: U.S. troops not ideal, but may be considered in Libya  (Ah, Obama, did you say “No Boots on the Ground?”  Maybe they will have rocket packs so they can hover just above the sand) 

Obviously Libya is a well thought out and executed plan.  We may need a score card to tell how many Rebels we kill and how many Kadaffi kills.  If we kill more than Kadaffi, does that mean we have to establish a No Fly Zone over ourselves?

Has anyone heard anything from the CIC?  When he was in South America having dinner, the press reported that he was able to direct a war (Libya) while having dinner, a true test of multi-tasking!  How come he can’t keep the American People informed about Libya while negotiating the government shutdown?  Oh, I mean the avoidance of a government shutdown. 

But there is one headline that should make your blood boil.  While Libya continues to be an exercise in abject incompetence, and Gates says we will be in Iraq after 2011, this headline says it all about the hatred of our military by Obama:

Military Sends Out Half-Pay Notice to War Zone Troops:  Link: Military Sends Out Half-Pay Notice to War Zone Troops
 

Obama will be the first President in modern history who has presided over a government shutdown and HAS NOT ISSUED ORDERS TO INSURE THAT THE MILITARY GETS PAID ON TIME.  The US Constitution, Section 2. Clause 1. states:  “The President shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States…”  At the very least Obama is a hack for not paying the Military and at the worst he is violating his oath to uphold the Constitution, specifically, Section 2, Clause 1.  He is engaging in dereliction of duty in the worst way just to try to score some political points against the Republicans who are trying to add some fiscal sanity back into our government. 

The headline you should really try wrap your head around is: 

No Death Benefits for Military During Shutdown

Just how sick is this President?  When one of our troops gives his or her all, and their dependents are struggling to pay for final expenses and transition through the loss of their loved one, Obama is going to make them wait for their meager death benefits?  What kind of a human being is occupying the White House.  Where are the Democrats and their outrage?  Abortions are more important to them than our troops.  What kind of message are we sending to our troops, our allies and our enemies? 

Don’t fall for the blame game that the Democrats are playing over the budget.  Remember the real issue, Obama had two changes to make sure our kids in uniform would be paid during the shut down and he voted “present” on both.  It is time for a CHANGE…

RD Pierini

 http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_NATO_LIBYA?SITE=AP&SECTON=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-04-08-08-25-00

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/GovernmentShutdown-MilitaryPay-Troops-Afghanistan/2011/04/08/id/392325

 http://www.newsmax.com/US/US-Shutdown-Military/2011/04/08/id/392314