Friday, March 26, 2010

President Obama Heading to California to Campaign for Barbara Boxer

Three Republicans that are fighting to get into the "ring" with Boxer are closing in and Boxer now finds herself facing her toughest re-election “bout” yet.

Considering the rise of incumbent unpopularity and the fact that Senator Barbara Boxer –– the three-term Democratic senator –– is confronting her own unfavorable rating, which has recently shot up to 51 percent; Boxer is now facing what is expected to be her toughest re-election “bout” yet. However, President Obama has decided to step in as “promoter in chief” and will be making a trip to California next month to help raise money for Boxer and the Democratic National Committee: a fundraiser event that is set to take place in Los Angeles.

Boxer, a staunch progressive, needs a jolt to her campaign because Republican hopefuls are closing in. The latest Rasmussen poll puts Boxer in a virtual dead heat with Tom Campbell in California’s U.S. Senate race and Carly Fiorina and Chuck DeVore remain within striking distance.

The three Republican candidates, who are in a match of their own fighting to get into the "ring" with Boxer, are aggressively stepping up their strategies and snatching strong “ringside” support. Carly Fiorina, the wealthy former Chief Executive of Hewlett-Packard, just last week secured a very high profile endorsement by former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. Tom Campbell, on the other hand, is a former member of Congress, who seems to fit the moderate Republican profile, has the backing of Conservative GOP politician Bill Simon. Meanwhile, Chuck DeVore, a Republican Assemblyman, has just snagged the support of the Tea Party Express, which will be announced today (Saturday - March 27, 2010) at a mega rally –– located in Senator Harry Reid's hometown of Searchlight, Nevada and headlined by former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

So far it looks like Fiorina has a slight lead over Campbell, while DeVore trails behind. The Republican California primary coming up in June will be fascinating to watch and its outcome will decide who will get into the much anticipated political bout with Boxer. And with such an important midterm election coming up in November, that looming question arises: will Boxer get “knocked out” of the California senate seat, marking a predominately liberal state into the “red?"

With "dope" now on the 2010 California November ballot, which has the possibility of turning California "brown," coupled with an unpredictable political climate, it is safe to assume anything can happen!

NEWS in Politics: BlogCritics
President Obama Going to California in April to Assist Senator Barbara Boxer
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 27, 2010 at 5:02 pm

National Broadside

Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Monday, March 22, 2010

ObamaCare Passes By Means of Arrogance, Deceit, and Payoffs


White House and Democratic leaders resort to tactics right out of Saul Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals. The ultimate rule: the ends justify the means.

"Look at how
this bill was written... can you say it was done openly — with transparency and accountability, without backroom deals and struck behind closed doors, hidden from the people? Hell, no you can't!" — House Minority Leader John Boehner on the House floor, March 21, 2010



More appalling than the health care bill itself, was the process which President Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi employed to guarantee a conquest –– one of the biggest entitlement programs and power grabs in our history.

The drama over ObamaCare began with dismissing and devaluing American citizens and their concerns. Criticism was combated with “citizen bashing,” which included terms like racists, stupid, and many other disparaging labels. In the midst of the health care reform hoopla were the ongoing backroom deals that were cut to buy Democratic votes with taxpayer money. Later stages opened up controversy over political procedural issues like reconciliation and the “deem and pass” rule. While Nancy Pelosi didn’t use the “Slaughter Solution” to pass ObamaCare, we learned that she and other Democrats do not have much respect for “the rules” and many are dead set on trampling on our liberties and “slaughtering” our Constitution.

Late Sunday, the ObamaCare push ended the way I had predicted, relying on Bart Stupak, who went from pro-life “hero” to pro-life phony. The once pack of twelve pro-life Democrats that dwindled to five by vote time, were “handled” during the final countdown with a promise of an executive order from the president, which in reality is worthless. And that's not just coming from the right, but directly from the lips of Democrat Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who told Fox News, “[this] executive order can't change the law.” Thanks to the Stupak “sellouts,” ObamaCare passed the House with a 219 to 212 vote (with no Republican support and 34 Democratic “no” votes) and this morning President Obama signed the health care bill, which is now the law of the land.

As a result of the Obama/Pelosi win, they quickly set into motion their “spin machine” (with much more to come) and are touting themselves as the “party that cares.” In both victory speeches they heralded delusional assumptions: Pelosi identified the House actions as “an act of patriotism,” the bill an “all American act,” and that it “honored our Founding Fathers.” Obama declared, amongst other things, that somehow the vote represented the “will of” and was a “victory for" the American people –– wasn't it more like 41%?

Now the Democrats are using rhetoric that doesn't match reality. Their marketing "fairy tale" campaign consists of discrediting criticism of the bill by asserting that those opposed don't care about children with pre-existing conditions, twenty-six-year-olds, and seniors' medications: three immediate benefits, yet, the substance of this glorious law will not take place until 2014. Moreover, they fail to divulge the many, many negative aspects like the mandates, fines and what it will eventually cost taxpayers, the states, and our country as a whole.

Not only did Democratic leaders attempt to deceive the American people with fuzzy math –– a plan that relies on ten years of offsets to pay for only six years of spending –– they failed to add the “doc fix,” which we know changes the numbers entirely and ObamaCare will ultimately explode the deficit. We have also been duped into thinking that student loans have something to do with health care and in the dark of the night, a plan to takeover our student loans was placed in the reconciliation package.

The Senate had an array of sweetheart deals or to put it in more current terms, "cash for votes." Payoffs included $100 million for the Cornhusker Kickback, $300 million for the Louisiana Purchase, $100 million for the Connecticut Hospital, and many more. Of no surprise, the right arm of Obama, SEIU, got their own deal in the Senate bill and was out in full force threatening House Democrats who opposed the bill.

The House Democrats were not exempt from hatching deals of their own: many were "bought off" one way or another. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who publicly opposed the bill, switched to a "yea" vote after his ride on Air Force One (taxpayer funded, of course). The Hispanic Caucus , who was set to vote against the bill, was appeased by Obama's "renewed commitment to immigration reform."

Shedding light on other ObamaCare bribes –– or just coincidences –– can be found at Code Red Deal Watch and today we find that Stupak was awarded over $700,000 in grants for three airports in his district, two days prior to voting. Another deal was devised and added to the reconciliation package that will benefit a couple of major insurance companies and quite a number of doctor-owned hospitals, which happens to affect Democratic Representatives Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania, and Bart Gordon of Tennessee. Coincidentally, a few states got their “pet projects” passed just in time for the House vote like Rep. Alan Boyd’s Florida National Forest Land Adjustment Act of 2009.

More sweetheart deals include Rep. Bart Gordon, who happened to change his vote from “no” to “yes” is set to get $100 million in Medicaid for Tennessee and the two Congressmen from California, Dennis Cardoza and Jim Costa (once a fence-sitter), may get an increase in federal water allotment in their districts sooner than anticipated. And there are more.

Today the focus turned toward the Senate to hash out the reconciliation package, AKA "the fix it bill," which was secured by a non-binding, promise letter from Harry Reid. Considering this Senate battle, the unanimous Republican opposition, and continuing American outrage, we can expect more health care drama to unfold.

Did ObamaCare pass by means of corrupt tactics? Hell, yes it did! If ObamaCare is so great, why did the White House and Democratic leaders have to resort to deception and bribe the Democrats in the Senate and the House for their votes? What is apparent is that we have a White House who is governing with arrogance and are only concerned about their political careers and their ideology. What is even clearer is that those on the far left believe and subscribe to Saul Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals where “the ends justify the means.”

In closing and using the words of our president from his victory speech, “This is what change looks like”: the kind of change –– the means and the end –– that we can count on in the future as this White House presses on to impose their radical, socialistic agenda (recently confirmed by Al Sharpton) on the American people.

ObamaCare Passes By Means of Arrogance, Deceit, and Payoffs
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 23, 2010 at 6:27 pm
Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Pro-life House Dems Thrown Under the Bus: "Stupak Dozen" Stand Firm

Pelosi is still scrambling for votes and so far she doesn't have the pro-life House Dems on board. "Slaughter Solution" is still on the table to pass ObamaCare.

With the stakes high over passing ObamaCare –– or not –– and only days left before President Obama is set to depart on his overseas trip (or will it be delayed again?), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is still scrambling for her 216 votes to "overhaul" our health care system.

In my last article about ObamaCare, I advised that we keep our eyes on Congressman Bart Stupak. Considering the vote count is close and the "Supak Dozen" (no confirmed list to be found) have threatened to vote no on the Senates' version of the health care reform bill unless the abortion language is fixed, Stupak has certainly been in the political limelight.

This morning on America Live with Megyn Kelly, Stupak was questioned in regards to the rumor that Pelosi has peeled back several of the "Stupak Dozen" votes. Stupak responded, "not even close," and announced once again, that he is a "NO" vote if the abortion language is not fixed.

Stupak also told Megyn Kelly that "the democratic majority would like to see public funding for abortion," which is consistent with other comments Stupak made public last week. Stupak's interview on Michigan's Mark & Walt Radio Show revealed a conversation he had with Representative Waxman about the Senate version of the health care bill. “I gave him the language. He came back a little while later and said, '”But we want to pay for abortions.'” “I said, 'Mr. Chairman, that's where we disagree. We don't do it now, we're not going to start.” "But we think should," Waxman answered.

More interesting is Stupak's phone interview with the National Review where he stated that the Democratic leadership's position is "that women, especially those without means available, should have their abortions covered.” Stupak also pointed out that the arguments the Democrats have made to him in recent deliberations “are a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party.” Without names this time, Stupak exposed one of the startling arguments that he was hearing, “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more."

Later, Stupak did clarify his comments for the NRO, stating that some of his conversations with Democratic members centered on the CBO's report, which claims that his amendment will cost $500 million to implement over ten years, and that costs should not be a reason to deny his amendment. That said; the update does not address the "more children will be born" comment, leaving many wondering what that was all about.

A few days ago, Stupak appeared On the Record with Greta, where he explained that they [his group] have worked hard to make sure current law is kept: no public funding for abortion, yet, he stated, "we haven't seen any language to placate our concerns." When Greta Van Susteren pressed Stupak if he had been approached by anyone from the top of the leadership, Supak responded with “no, because they disagree with me on the issue, so they'll wait until the last minute and see if they can run –– do an end run, get the votes without us."

Despite the fact that the Democrats have thrown pro-life House Democrats "under the bus,” it looks like the "Stupak Dozen" are standing firm –– at least we can confirm that Bart Stupak is.

In the wake of the Stupak saga arises that daunting question: how many votes does Pelosi have and can she pass the Senate bill without the "Stupak Dozen?" The answer could lie in the fact that the House Democrats may not vote at all because they are considering using the “Slaughter Solution” AKA the self-executing rule –– no up or down vote, just “deem and pass."

Pelosi and the rest of the House Democrats should be aware that Americans are watching: we do care about the "process" as well as the product, and whoever votes for the "rule change" is a vote in favor of ObamaCare, DemCare, or in context of the Hyde Amendment –– Dems "don't" Care.

Pro-life House Dems Thrown Under the Bus: "Stupak Dozen" Stand Firm
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 17, 2010 at 4:03 pm
Also on National Broadside
Brought to you by Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Supreme Court Justice’s Wife Launches Conservative Movement Linked to Tea Party

Virginia Thomas (citizen) energized into action by President Obama's "hard-left agenda." Left-wing media projects possible "conflict of interest."

According to the Los Angeles Times, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, told Tea Party leaders in Washington, "I am an ordinary citizen from Omaha, Nebraska, who just may have the chance to preserve liberty along with you and other people like you." Apparently, Mrs. Thomas went on to count herself among those energized into action by President Obama's "hard-left agenda."

Mrs. Thomas is energized all right! So much so, that in January she launched a non-profit, conservative, tea-party-linked movement –– Liberty Central –– whose mission includes "activating informed American patriots who are seeking knowledge of the core founding principles and passionate about preserving freedom and liberty.” LibertyCentral.org will serve the big tent of the conservative movement by using a three-prong approach: education, motivation, and activism. Back in February, Mrs. Thomas (wearing her Liberty Central sweatshirt), had a pleasant interview with Ed Morrissey at CPAC, highlighting her focus and Liberty Centrals' "five core founding principles" –– limited government, personal responsibility, individual liberty, national security, and free enterprise. Mrs. Thomas also described the Tea Party as "new citizen activists," something she is very excited about and wants to be part of.

While the author of Sunday's LA Times article, Kathleen Hennessey, does point out that experts don't deem Mrs. Thomas' work as a violation of ethical rules, noting that “under judicial rules, judges must curb political activity, but a spouse is free to engage,” her tone and tag line paint a different slant. Ms. Hennessy projects that Mrs. Thomas’ activism “is likely to test notions of political impartiality for the court." Andy McCarthy of the National Review quickly fired back, calling Hennessey’s piece a "hit job on Ginni Thomas" and documented the blatant double standard of the left-wing media and their on-going "war" against Conservatives (especially women).

Where was the left-wing media's "conflict of interest" outcry when Mrs. Obama, who was armed with a task force and got a State of the Union "shout out" –– unlike our Supreme Court who were humiliated with a “shout down” –– launched her Let's Move Campaign? Did they miss the fact that the controversial left-wing group, SEIU, has been caught with their greedy hands in the "childhood obesity cookie jar?” Who by the way, lobby’s for and benefits from proposed legislation, who just happens to have strong and direct ties to Mrs. Obama's husband –– our President. Hmmm.

Supreme Court Justice’s Wife Launches Conservative Movement Linked to Tea Party
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 16, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Also on National Broadside
Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Life of ObamaCare Relies on Abortion Language: All Eyes on Bart Stupak

A week ago, Pelosi and Stupak were “liars,” this week a so-called "compromise" was brewing: what "drama" is next?

Late last week, the National Review summed up the fight over a government takeover of health care this way: "The attention is on the Senate, but the battle is in the House." You see, Democrats want to force the House to vote on the bill already passed by the Senate by March 18 –– the day the president leaves for an overseas trip. And part of the ObamaCare battle is the abortion language — it clearly allows federal funding for abortion.

News broke early yesterday morning announcing that Representative Bart Stupak thinks a "compromise” can be reached on the issue of abortion funding in the Democrats' Senate version of the health care bill. “I’m more optimistic than I was a week ago,” Stupak said in an interview between meetings with constituents in his northern Michigan district. Hmmm... while many were speculating the meaning behind the so-called "compromise," including myself, it looks like Stupak had an interview with The Weekly Standard yesterday, where he clarified what was really going on. "Obviously they don’t know me," Stupak said in his interview. "If I didn’t cave in November, why would I do it now after all the crap I’ve been through? Everyone’s going around saying there’s a compromise — there’s no such thing," Stupak said. What's changed between this week and last, Stupak went on, is that he had his first real conversation with Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Congressman Henry Waxman about fixing the bill.

The latest health care "drama" began to unfold directly following the health care summit “sham” –– plus C-SPAN, minus the beer –– and President Obama’s news conference, escorted by “people in the white coats,” urging Congress to allow an "up or down vote" on the Democrats' health care bill. Since then, two key words have been in the limelight: one that has the power to give “life,” the other to “kill.” Pundits, politicians, and American citizens have been discussing and debating reconciliation and back into the health care debate is the dreaded and highly controversial abortion issue.

Stupak has made it clear that “he and a dozen other Democrats who voted yes the first time will vote no on the Senate health care bill because it provides taxpayer funding for abortion." Last week it was the clash over who was telling the truth, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Stupak were practically calling each other liars. Nancy Pelosi got irritated (what else is new) during her weekly news conference, claiming, "There is no federal funding for abortion. That is the law of the land. It is not changed in this bill." Three hours later, Stupak fired back. “She’s incorrect,” he said. “I’d ask the speaker to direct her attention to page 2069 through page 2078. There are two ways in those pages where you pay for abortion. Number one, you get tax breaks that subsidize your insurance policy that will pay for abortion. Number two, when you read the legislation, one dollar per month for all enrollees, must go into this fund for ‘reproductive care,’ which includes abortion coverage.”

What a difference a week makes. Ironically, the life of ObamaCare is partly dependent on abortion –– Stupak and other pro-life Democrats. Last week, the question remained on the House floor: will abortion kill ObamaCare legislation, which the majority of Americans oppose? And this week, apparently the abortion language has not been fixed yet, which leads me to another question: will the pro-life Democrats stand firm on their convictions (moral code) or will they sell out like Senator Ben Nelson did? Considering all of the back-room deals, bribes, and other shenanigans that took place in order to pass the Senate's version of the health care reform bill, it is hard to say what will happen next. As we get closer to the new Obama deadline –– eight days away –– and as the Democrats get more desperate, you can bet the fight over ObamaCare will get much more ugly.

BlogCritics in Politics
Life of ObamaCare Relies on Abortion Language: All Eyes On Bart Stupak
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 10, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

STOP ObamaCare!