CONTEMPT IT IS

Attorney General Eric Holder made history yesterday.  He is the first Cabinet member to be held in criminal and civil contempt of Congress.  This vote could have been avoided, if only he had turned over the requested documents.  His refusal puts the entire blame for this exercise on his shoulders, and his alone. Holder brought the contempt charges on himself when he chose to ignore the US Congress' legitimate demands for information to which they had every right. His contempt for the US Congress and the American people in this and other matters has now officially been reciprocated. One hundred democrats refused to vote, choosing instead to walk out. Seventeen democrats not only stayed to vote, but crossed the aisle and voted to hold Holder in criminal contempt.  Twenty-one democrats voted to hold him in civil contempt.

CONTEMPT AND PRIVILEGE

In the latest twist on the eighteen-month-long endeavor to discover what exactly happened in regards to Operation Fast and Furious, the House Oversight Committee voted to cite Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress.   It passed the committee 23-17 - on party lines - and is now headed to the floor of the House for a vote that is expected to take place some time next week (where is is expected to pass - again on a party line vote).  For those not familiar with OF&F, go here and here for background.

AH, CIVILITY

The House voted to repeal Obamacare today, 245-189.  It comes as no surprise, just as it won't be surprising when Harry Reid pretends HR2 doesn't exist and refuses to bring it up for a vote. 

This was the first full debate on the House floor since the Tuscon shootings.  The new Era of Civility™  has started off with quite a bang (am I allowed to say that anymore?).  Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN)  got the civility theater going today with his comparison of his Republican peers with Nazi propagandist extraordinaire, Joseph Goebbles. 

What class.  What style.  What civility(?).

Maybe I just don't understand the meaning of the term "civility".  After all, I'm conservative, so I must be mentally deficient, right (just ask Janeane Garofalo)?  Well, according to Merriam-Webster, civility is:

a polite act or expression

Now, maybe I'm crazy, but comparing more than half of your colleagues to a vicious,  soulless slaughterer of innocents on a massive scale seems a bit, well, uncivil, does it not?

When questioned about his...unique take on civility, his answer was quite a feat of verbal gymnastics (via HotAir):

“I don’t think I was comparing the Republicans to Goebbels. I was saying that lies are lies and Goebbels was the great perpetrator of lies and that’s a danger, and if you look at Goebbels you can see the lie that he told about Jews which he constantly did, became considered fact in Germany that the Jews were evil, and people got involved and didn’t stand up.”…


“I think civility is not lying, and if you can’t come up and say that somebody is lying when they’re lying, then the lie becomes the truth. That’s not uncivil to say somebody lied,” he said.

So apparently, his definition of civility is "not lying".  Which dictionary did that definition come from, Rep. Cohen? 

Beyond that, what he has done is set up a sort of 'incivility word problem'.  If lies = lies + Goebbels = lies then lies = Republicans means Republicans = Goebbels.  Deductive reasoning, anyone? 

CNN, (former home of a political talkshow called Crossfire) in their desperation to set the 'tone' (and hopefully boost ratings), have become whimpering pc apologists.  The national attempt to have this 'conversation on violent rhetoric' has made it very clear to almost everyone (even the women on The View) that not using martial phraseology is nearly impossible, even in everyday, non-vitriolic, non-hate speech.  Sherri Shepard went so far as to throw her hands up in disgust and say, "I give up" after several attempts to describe how the crosshairs rhetoric was 'under fire'.

These phrases are commonly used because they are apt analogies.  Not being able to use common phrases like 'battleground', 'targeted', 'under fire', or even Joy Behar's comedic reference to 'killed it' should open up a whole new dialogue, the stifling of free speech. 

Ultimately though, we also need to have a dialogue on mental illness.  The biggest failure in this whole situation was that Loughner was obviously disturbed, the police and college were involved, and yet he never received any psychiatric help.  It seems Arizona's 5150 laws are pretty robust, though, considering how little Eric Fuller did to warrant a 72 hour psychiatric hold and evaluation (although the "ear necklace" thing was pretty creepy).  Perhaps if Loughner had undergone the same thing, 6 people wouldn't be dead today.  The ball was dropped here.  This kid was so crazy that people got a malevolent vibe just sitting near him.  Not just his teachers, but his fellow classmates feared for their lives to the point where they had planned out an exit strategy if he pulled a gun in class.   He built a shrine to a human skull in his backyard, for heaven's sake, and ranted about mind control through grammar online.  And yet, to date, there is no evidence that he had any sort of psychiatric evaluation whatsoever. 

Jared Loughner was crazy.  Period.  Rep. Giffords was unable to answer one nonsensical question from him back in 2007, and she was targeted.  In the ironic twist of the century, the non-conservative lunatic gunman tried to kill her not because of violent right-wing rhetoric, but, technically, for no rhetoric at all. 


Stifling speech to make a political point is unacceptable.  Yet again, the neo-pravda media, in their eternal conservative witch hunt, have attempted to 'frame' a debate that has nothing at all to do with the tragedy they are exploiting.  Here's a little hint guys - your job is to report the news, not opine on what you think might have motivated the killer.  And if you absolutely must, well, that's what editorials are for. 

As for people like Cohen, who demand civility from one side of their mouth while spewing vitriol out the other, you are a huge part of the problem.  This practice isn't about 'furthering debate', it's all about shutting down debate.  And that's NOT what this country is all about.  You may not be happy about what the opposition is doing, but repealing an unpopular bill is in no way equitable with the Final Solution.  Above and beyond that, if you insist, Rep. Cohen, on going down that path, that is your right as a citizen of this country.  However, you then forfeit your right to criticize anyone else who does so, or risk losing credibility permanently. 

FUNNY BUSINESS

Today our federal government officially jumped the shark.  It couldn't have been more apparent if they had called Ted McGinley to testify instead of Stephen Colbert.  Don't get me wrong, Colbert is great.  He's a funny guy.  But how in the world is he qualified to testify on immigration - in character, no less?

The reality show that is Washington politics of late has gone too far.  By inviting Colbert, Immigration Subcommittee chairwoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) turned the entire immigration debate, as well as congressional hearings, into a joke.  And not even a good one, with all due respect to Mr. Colbert, who was doing his satirical best:



Okay, so he was kind of funny.  In an awkward, trainwreck-y kind of way.  You really can't fault him for doing it - what entertainer in their right mind would give up a chance to play the Hill?  Even the famous Onion, the University of Wisconsin's hilariously satirical newspaper/website, couldn't have dreamed this up.  This will boost his ratings phenominally, and he will come out of this just fine.  The people who invited him to speak, however, may not fare so well.  Unless, of course, Rep. Lofgren is angling for her own show in case she loses on Nov. 2nd - in this job climate, it's every congressperson for themselves, and sometimes you have to think outside of the box!

Some democrats seem to be slaves to the cult of personality, and Colbert's appearance plays more like a desperate attempt for the party to be seen as hip and cool than a legitimate attempt to investigate policy issues.  The fact that this opens them up to ridicule and lowers the profile of the US governement as a whole seems to matter little to Lofgren.  At least Rep. John Conyers )D-MI) tried to stop the circus and preserve the dignity of our legislative branch.  He most likely saw what many other people saw - the serious issue of immigration reform, the U.S. Congress and the democrat party in general being made a mockery of in one fell swoop.

In a country where Comedy Central's Daily Show host Jon Stewart is seen as the most trusted name in news, this irresponsible dog and pony show will only further blur the line between real world politics and political satire.

At least we got a laugh out of it.

GUSHERS AS FAR AS THE EYE CAN SEE

The Obama administration is in the midst of a series of crises that all have something in common.  They are all gushers, and the administration is slow to react and ineffective with all of them.

The Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico is the most physical  representation of this premise. The Obama administration was responsible for coordinating the cleanup and working with BP in partnership to deal with the disaster, while allowing BP to fix the well as quickly as possible (preferably with the help of a panel of industry experts, not congressmen).  Instead, he waited a ridiculously long time -  a month - to address the nation about the disaster, dragged his feet on requests by governors of the affected states and waited almost two months to talk to the heads of BP - on day 58, to be exact.  To make things worse, instead of working in partnership with BP to solve the problem and expedite the cleanup, the administration threatened litigation, demanded huge sums of money and demonized the company and the industry to the public in an attempt to garner support for their pet eco-legislation.  And here we are, more than 80 days later, and the oil is still gushing, the press are blocked from reporting accurately and the people are suffering.  The oil is still creeping towards our shores and the response has been sporadic and anemic.  It has been nearly three months - there should be a synchronized, well organized response worked out, but there isn't.  It seems sometimes that the primary objective of the administration is litigation and moratoriums, not making things right on the ground, where it counts.

Which brings us to our next political gusher.  Jobs.  There just doesn't seem to be any relief in sight, even with a nearly trillion dollar stimulus package, a huge increase in budgetary spending. and all sorts of porky little goodies in a myriad of other legislative actions.  The administration is trying to sell the public that they are pro-business, but the fear in the business sector over increased upcoming regulations and taxation and the demonization of corporate america tells a different story.  The drilling moratorium they are trying to force through the judicial system (they're on their third attempt already) seems to be more about scoring political points with their base, but will probably do more harm than good if successful, since there are hundreds of thousands of jobs on the line - in a recession, in states that are already in deep distress from the loss of the fishing industry and tourism.  Every month we are told that we have turned the corner, and things are getting better.  But when the unemployment number dropped from 9.7% to 9.5% recently, it wasn't because of an increase in jobs, it was because over 500,000 people have given up and dropped out of the workforce.  That is not a victory. 

The third political gusher is the deficit/debt.  This country is hemorrhaging money at an alarming pace.  For every issue that has come up, the administration's answer seems to have been throwing enormous sums of money at it.  We are being burdened with new legislation that is going to cost north of a trillion dollars and wasted ten economically devastating months  The $835 billion stimulus was a bust, and so they have put forward a new whatever-you-want-to-call-it-just-so-its-not-'stimulus' bill, arguing that they just didn't go big enough the first time.  Really?  Nearly a trillion dollars wasn't enough?  The experts are advising an immediate end to spending or there is a possibility of a major crash.  Instead they are trying to pour more money into the system like it's going out of style, and, at best, we are stagnating; at worst we are going over a cliff.

The fourth gusher is in Arizona, where they have been plagued by a flood of illegal immigrants.  Most of the illegals are peaceful, hardworking people who just want a better life, but there is are many that are not, and they are wreaking havok on the state.  Above and beyond that, the peaceful illegals are still a burden on the state - a state that is facing a budget deficit of over a billion dollars this year and more than three billion next year.  The biggest problem, though, is that the mexican drug cartels have moved in with a vengeance.  The administration's response to the situation has been to sue the state over their immigration enforcement legislation and to put up signs declaring portions of the state to be too dangerous for americans.  Because nothing says 'effective governance' like forfeiting sovereignty of 80 miles of American land.  Obama has halted all building on a border fence and, although he has sent down national guard troops, it is woefully inadequate.  The administration seems content to allow things to continue as they have been, even though more and more americans are dying, and a major city, Phoenix, is becoming a violent no-man's land. 

For those who prefer to play the 'blame Bush' game, yes, many of these problems started under Bush. But the 2006 and 2008 elections were referendums against the Bush years. Obama and the democrat led congress ran on and were put in office specifically to change these things. The more things change, it seems, the more they stay the same.  Or, in this case, get worse.

Which brings us to the final gusher.  This is the one that has been caused by all the others - the deluge of political fallout.  And boy, is it a doozy.  From the drop in approval to the sinking polls, it doesn't look good.  This administration seems to have forgotten that they were ushered into power by citizens who were not so much voting for them as voting against the previous administration. They have dropped the ball on that mandate, and as a result voters are flowing in an ever increasing flood away from congressional democrats who, in turn, are starting to distance themselves from the president.  Others are even trying to sell themselves as 'outside the beltway'.  Um, if you've been in office for, say, 18 years, you're an insider.   This gusher started with a trickle of political goodwill last year, but now is approaching floodlike conditions.  Even the White House spokesman is conceding a possible loss of the House.  Here we are in mid-July, and reality seems to be suddenly dawning on those in power (but not all).  They are trying to staunch the flow by slinging mud and blaming others, but the other gushers have so seeped into people's consciences that it's unlikely they will be distracted.

In 2008, we were faced with an economic crisis that was worse than anything we had faced in decades, so we installed a government that promised change.  In a year and a half, we have added unprecedented spending, the worst oil spill in american history, a major crisis on the border and unemployment that went from 6.7% at the end of the Bush administration all the way up to 10.2% in Oct. '09, settling now to the current rate of 9.5%, with no end in sight.  All of these major crises have been backburnered by the administration in favor of passing health care legislation or attempting to push through amnesty comprehensive immigration reform and cap and trade in order to capitalize on them without ever doing anything concrete to solve the actual crisis.  With all of these crises, the administration has taken abominably long to act, which has, in turn, allowed them to get so much worse.

The final gusher is set reach maximum flow in November and, much like the other gushers, the administration is doing too little, too late, and this one looks like it, too, is out of their control.

GRAYSON SUPPORTS THE TEA PARTY?

Today a gentleman from Alan Grayson's campaign knocked on my door.  His purpose was to have me sign paperwork so that Mr. Grayson and his campaign could help me register to vote, because apparently I'm not capable of doing it myself.

Thanks, but no thanks.

I have been voting for many years now, and have never once had someone working for a candidate come to my door to offer to take care of registering for me.  I prefer to register the legal way, all by myself.  I find it difficult to trust the "congressman from ACORN" with my voting information.   After all, the man is implicated in election shenanigans already:





Please note the use of Alinsky Rule #5 when deflecting questioning about the tea party allegations in an interview with CNN:

5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."

This rule seems to be his personal motto.  Hopefully Alinsky meant  he should make a complete ass out of himself in the process, because if so, Grayson nailed it.
 
Grayson denies any connection to this scandal, but he seems to think he is too smart by half and that Tea Party supporters are idiots, so why not try to pull the wool over their eyes?  After all, he's been so very supportive of the tea baggers partyers in the past (warning: Joy Behar is in the linked clip - those with weak stomachs should not view).  Why wouldn't they fall for it?

The question is, would he really stoop to such things? He can certainly afford it - he's the 7th richest member of the House (ranked 12th when you include the Senate). In addition, on a list of 30 vulnerable House seats, he ranks 13th. As an accomplished lawyer, there is a good chance he knows how to set up organizations and make it nearly impossible to discover who controls them.


That covers means, motive and ability. All that's left is a concrete tie to Public Opinion Strategies. Channel 6's Tony Pipitone seems tenacious, so hopefully he will find more information. 

In the meantime, Grayson seems to be taking a two-pronged approach to this election.  He understands his district is historically republican, so attempting to split the ticket by setting up and funding a 'tea party' candidate seems like a logical way to pull out a win in November.  The 'Congressman from ACORN' is also apparently taking on the voter registration duties of the allegedly defunct organization now as well, if the door-to-door experience I had today was any indication. That's a scary thought.

With a little luck, Pipitone will uncover the missing link, and the story will get legs.  Until then, please be sure to check out Grayson's legitimate opponents:

 Patricia Sullivan, Bruce O’Donoghue, Dan Fanelli, Peg Dunmire, Kurt Kelly, Todd Long and Steven Gerritzen (Whig).

ARIZONA AND CALDERON

Megyn Kelly went on the O'Reilly Factor tonight to discuss the Arizona immigration law.  She not only read the law in question, SB 1070, she also read the federal immigration law as well as a few supreme court cases pertaining to the federal law. 

This isn't good news for the 24% who oppose the law, because she found that the Arizona law is much like the federal law, with the exception that it is even more strict as far as what the police can and cannot do than the federal statute.

ooops.  There goes that narrative!

No doubt her findings will get no press coverage whatsoever.  Even though 71% of Arizonans approve of the legislation, 55% of Americans would like to see their states adopt similar legislation, and Arizona governor Jan Brewer has enjoyed a 19 point jump in her poll numbers since last month, according to Rasmussen.  Check out Pew's polling numbers on the issue. 

Thankfully, our esteemed Congress didn't embarrass themselves in their ignorance.  Oh, wait. 

No doubt their cheering on a foreign head of state as he attempts to dictate immigration policy to them is standard procedure.  Doubtless, too, they will take his recommendation to reinstate the assault weapons ban under advisement.  If we're really, really lucky, maybe he will tell us what to do about Cap and Trade and Iran as well.  Dare to dream.

Perhaps someone in this administration will grow a spine and recommend Calderon get control of his own country before attempting to impose his views on this one. Things obviously aren't going well down there if one-third of the country are so desperate to get out that they are willing to run the gauntlet of a desert, coyotes (both animal and human), and border patrols. Let's face it - if Mexico wasn't such a disaster, we wouldn't have such a huge problem on our borders.

The fact that Obama and the democrats supported this pompous ass and his insulting behavior is nothing short of disgraceful. 

YOU CUT

Congressional Republicans, headed by Minority Whip Eric Cantor have started a new website called "You Cut" that allows common Americans to vote for what spending cuts you want to see Congress adopt.


This is an interesting idea, if it takes off. They are offering up five different spending programs for the chopping block each week. Whatever program earns the most votes from the public will be offered up for a vote in Congress the next week. No doubt they will get a lot of flack and ridicule from the left over this one, but I personally think it's great for a few reasons.

First of all, it's fascinating to see all of the ways that Congress is wasting our money (and how much is being wasted). You hear rumors about some of the crazy or unnecessary things our money is being spent on, but to see it in black and white on a Congressional website, well, it really puts it into perspective. If you have high blood pressure or ulcers, you might want to medicate yourself before you check it out each week!

Second, in a political climate where it often feels like the train is out of control and heading off the tracks, this offers a way to give Congress your two cents on a very important issue - spending. And not just spending in general, as we have been attempting to do with the Tea Parties - we're talking specific, targeted spending programs. President Obama created the deficit reduction committee, but it won't be coming out with anything constructive until December, and doubtless there will be more in the way of taxation instead of spending cuts in their recommendations. Increased taxation will only prolong our suffering - especially at the levels they will need to tax in order to make a dent in the deficit. The only way out of this hole is through spending cuts. Politicians hate spending cuts because someone always loses out and voters become alienated. Perhaps if the cuts are brought to them by popular demand, they will grow some spines and do what's necessary to save this country from financial ruin. Don't hold your breath, though. These are politicians we're talking about, after all.

Finally, there are major political ramifications to this. As I mentioned before, the left will attempt to ridicule the Republicans on this - after all, when they have no other defense, they always turn to derision. The odds of the democrats voting down these proposed cuts are very high, but they need to really think before they do so. Not only will they be voting down Republican introduced spending cuts at a time when they are trying to paint themselves as deficit hawks, but they will be voting down cuts that were presented to Congress by popular fiat. They are used to thumbing their noses at We the Peons in general, but this will be a direct dismissal of what the American people want. The big question is, will their unprecedented tone deafness go that far?

In order to submit your vote, you must give them an email address. That's it. No other personal information required. You can vote more than once (I voted first for the Welfare Non-Reform Program and then the Subsidized Union Activities), and you can vote online or via text. So check out "You Cut" on Eric Cantor's website. Let me know what you think, and, as they say in Chicago, vote early and vote often!

 

Cross Posted at The Sisterhood of the Mommy Patriots

OPERATION HOUSECALL REDUX

It's time to do your part and call your congressperson.  It will be difficult, because the phone lines have been notoriously busy, but it's worth it.  Let your voice be heard.  But remember - be polite, be concise, and be firm.

If you can't spend an hour or two hitting redial, send them an email.  You can only email the congressman who directly represents you.  You might also want to try the local offices for your representative in your state.  Burn up their phone lines, too.  Word will get back to them, fear not.

To email your congressman, click here.  You will need your zip code and four digit zip code extension in order to email the right representative.

Here is the US Capitol switchboard number - (202) 224-3121.  Ask for your representative by name.  Be prepared for a busy signal, but don't lose hope - people are getting through.

You can also check out Congress.org's congressional directory.  You can enter either your zip code (it might ask you for a street address if you live in a county with split districts) or your reps name.  A page will come up with the representative's name and vital stats.  There are tabs at the top of the page - the second tab is for contact information.  You can connect with his/her congressional website to leave an email, or contact their D.C. office or their local offices via telephone.

Operation Housecall is in effect again.  It's time to do our civic duty and remind our representatives that they work for us.  At least, for now.....

THE SLAUGHTER SOLUTION Updated

The left's desperation over ObamaCare is getting to be quite revealing.  They are willing to make just about any promise, grease any palm, to get this thing passed. 

They will offer up an amendment for abortion that they promise they will pass - eventually. But House dems have to vote first - just take the Senate's word for the whole amendment thing - they're good for it.

Really.

They are willing to turn a well respected, 92 year old Senator into a hypocrite for the cause.  They are even willing to offer your brother a judicial appointment if that does the trick.  If those persuasions weren't enough, there is always a little arm twisting to get you to see the light.

The dems have been shut down at every turn, though. so now they are pulling out all the stops, and legality apparently isn't a necessary requirement anymore.

Rep. Louise Slaughter, chairwoman of the House Rules Committee, has come up with a solution to Pelosi's dilemma.  Madame Speaker is short on votes and no matter how she tries, she's just not able to win them over.  At least her method of pushing out the dead weight has helped her a little.  Unfortunately, she still can't manage to cross the finish line.  That's where the Slaughter Solution comes in.

In a nutshell, the House will pass a rule that says they 'deem' the Senate bill passed by the House - without actually voting on and passing it in reality. 

Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.

Isn't it nice that in the land of unicorns and rainbows in which our congress now lives wishes really do come true? 

It seems that all Pelosi has to do now is wish for health care to pass, and presto! consider it done.  This goes beyond bending the rules.  Would someone please check out the trash bin behind the Capitol and see if the Constitution is in it?  Maybe the Dalai Lama has seen it. 

They have actually resorted to trying to pass the bill without a vote.  In the Constitution is very clearly states how a bill becomes a law (emphasis mine):

First, a bill must pass both houses of Congress by a majority vote. After it has passed out of Congress, it is sent along to the President. If the President signs the bill, it becomes law.

Please note the very first thing that is required is for both houses of Congress to pass the bill by a majority vote.  Rep. Slaughter must have a case of Clintonitis, but instead of wondering what the definition of "is" is, she is wondering what the definition of "vote" is.   Let me give you a clue, madame chairwoman - "deeming" something does not constitute a majority vote.  Unless, of course, Queen Pelosi has somehow managed to turn our constitutional republic into a monarchy/dictatorship.

Radio host Mark Levin (formerly a constutional lawyer) is calling for Slaughter's expulsion.  He calls this effort "brazen" (via American Thinker):

Here we have the President of the United States and Congressional leaders actually talking about the possibility of a brazen and open violation of one of the most fundamental aspects of our Constitution and Republic! How we actually make laws!Let me be as clear as I know how. If this is done, this will create the greatest Constitutional crisis since the Civil War. It would be 100 times worse than Watergate.

...It would be government by fiat... meaning there would be no law... the mere discussion by officials in this government is such a grotesque violation of the actual legislative function of Congress [that it] puts us... at the brink. At the brink.

This really is a frightening step.  This is in violation of everything this country was founded on. 

There is a tiny part of me that wants them to pass this epic piece of manipulation, graft and backroom deals they call a bill this way.  There's no way in hell it will pass the sniff test with the Supreme Court.  It will get thrown out and we will be rid of it forever.  Maybe we'll get a twofer and get rid of the progressives, too.

Oh, and if the bill isn't bad enough as it stands, the House is also talking about adding in the nationalization of student loans for good measure.  After all, if you're going to send out a nice big "screw you" to the american people, you may as well double down.

As a bonus, Obama's trip to Asia has been postponed and all congressional hearings have been cancelled to focus on health care. Aren't these the same people who ridiculed John McCain for delaying a debate and suspending his campaign to deal with the financial crisis?  What was it they said?  Something about multitasking and grandstanding, wasn't it?  The economy and unemployment can wait.   After all, health care is number...um...eight on the public's priorities list. 

The stench of desperation is getting rather cloying these days, isn't it?

UPDATE:  Former Bush appointee Judge Michael McConnell weighs in (via The Volokh Conspiracy):

The Slaughter solution attempts to allow the House to pass the Senate bill, plus a bill amending it, with a single vote. The senators would then vote only on the amendatory bill. But this means that no single bill will have passed both houses in the same form. As the Supreme Court wrote in Clinton v. City of New York (1998), a bill containing the “exact text” must be approved by one house; the other house must approve “precisely the same text.”

With all due respect, I beg to differ on one point.  The Slaughter Solution attempts to allow the House to pass three bills with a single vote - don't forget the nationalization of the student loan industry that they have tucked into the reconciliation. 

Aside from that, bravo!

THE LAWYER WAY

One of the main problems with the health care takeover this administration is attempting is a shortage of doctors.  Adding 31 million people to the rolls will put quite a strain on our system, and we can't just retask, say, the plumbers union.  It takes more than a decade to make a doctor - longer for a specialist.  So why are they plunging willy-nilly into a system that is inadequite and unprepared?

Well, that opens up an interesting line of thought.  We can all agree that Washington is a nest of lawyers, right?  The democrat party, in particular is just chock full of legal eagles.  Yes, the republicans have lawyers in their ranks, too, but not to the level of the current democrat party.  

Have you ever been to one of those really successful law firms?  Maybe availed yourself of their services?  There are a few partners and junior partners, but the bulk of the office consists of legal assistants, clerks and paralegals.  Those are the people doing the work, researching and putting the case together.  The partners are there to present in court, meet with clients and give final approval.  It's a good formula, and it seems to work for them, aside from the fact that it is like a legal factory, pumping cases through as quickly as possible or dropping them altogether if they aren't profitable enough.

Unfortunately, the lawyers in Congress who are reshaping one-sixth of our economy through our health care system are doing it in their own image.  The problem is, the system that works so well for them just won't work for doctors.

There's really only one reason this system doesn't work for doctors, but boy, is it a doozy - lives literally hang in the balance.  To me, that's a pretty big reason.  If a paralegal cites the wrong case, people don't die.  Nurses and PAs are great at screening out and dealing with basic or minor cases, thus reducing the case load for the doctor, but their skills only go so far.  Vastly increasing the case load without increasing the doctor pool will force the use of nurses and PAs for cases beyond their training.  Casualties will be inevitable.

Perhaps if Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid had listened to the doctors in Congress, they might have created  different bills.  (While they were at it, they should have had the doctors fix their tone deafness...)  Predictably, they went it alone - Nanny Pelosi knows best! 

Maybe I'm overthinking this, maybe not, but it certainly deserves debate.  Everyone is caught up in process and cost right now, but we need to look at the effects of this bill as well.  This is a very big point, and something that will be effecting us fairly quickly and very personally.  The reforms start to go into effect in 2014, so there would have to be incentives to persuade students to switch their majors, but even then, the reforms will be in full swing before those candidates become full-fledged doctors.

When you add in how many doctors may be retiring or quitting upon signing this legislation into law, that means trouble.

The odds are pretty good, too, that eventually they will want to cap earnings for doctors to keep down costs, so I can't imagine that would be a big incentive for future generations of doctors.  Nothing like holding someone's life in your hands for minimum wage. 

When do we get to cap the lawyer's salaries?  Oh, that's right - never.

So, while I don't mind having a paralegal take care of my basic legal needs, when I go to the doctor, I want to see a doctor.   I went to a gastroenterologist a few years ago and was seen by his PA.  He was a nice guy, and seemed quite capable, but my case was beyond his expertise and he told me as much.  I appreciated his candor, but ended up having to find a new doctor, because it was impossible to get in to see the doctor himself, either due to surgeries or a lack of available appointments - they kept trying to get me in to see the PA instead. 

Luckily, I was able to find another doctor who had a smaller practice and was able to see me himself.  As a matter of fact, I don't believe his office even employed a PA.   My ability to find a doctor who could cater to my needs will be a thing of the past if the health care reforms pass.  I know they keep insisting that "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor", but how in the world do they expect to stretch the depleted doctor pool to cover 31 million more people?

Which brings me back to my premise.  The system lawyers have developed has enabled them to spread their resources in a way that allows them maximum profitability and effectiveness.  But that system just won't work for the medical field, because medicine is about more than just profitability and effectiveness - it's about people's lives.  The lawyers in Congress need to start waking up to that reality.

GAME ON

The race is on to ge the votes to pass reconciliation.  Let the arm twisting and bribery begin.

Not only do we need to remember that the Senate bill includes the 'Louisiana Purchase' and the 'Cornhusker Kickback', but that they will be adding to it, as well.

I'm sure there will be plenty of arms twisted, if push comes to shove, but the preferred method these days
is 'sweeteners' - you and I would call them bribes.  And you know what?  Since we're footing the bill, we get to name it.  It't time to start calling things what they are, so 'bribery' it is.

The first one to pop up is quite a doozy.

Congressman Jim Matheson's (D-UT) brother has just been nominated for a federal judgeship.  What a coincidence.  I don't know what's worse - the obvious vote buying going on, or the country's blase attitude about it.  The sad part is, the brother is probably a good judicial candidate, but now he may be sullied by the whole affair and may end up paying a career price as well.

It will be interesting to see what else is being bartered and how successful those graft attempts are once the sun shines in.

This whole situation is, at best, an embarrassment - they are behaving like some third world country.  I'm waiting for someone to throw a chair, followed by a mass brawl.  At worst, this is highly unethical.  Not that that means much of anything anymore.

Hopefully this will be the only post about outright bribery, but the pattern of ethics that has been established so far by this Congress points in the other direction. 

So what do you think the odds are that this story will get picked up by the neo-pravda media?

JUST A FEW QUESTIONS

The 2011 budget proposal was just released.  Can someone please explain to me how the budget increased by $200 billion despite a spending freeze?

While you're at it, could you please tell my why I should be excited by $20 billion in 'savings'?

Also, why, exactly, is Cap and Trade being discussed again?  The AGW argument is falling apart more and more with every day that passses, but for some reason we need to invest in green technology now, now, now!

While we're at it, I'd also like to know why Paul Kirk is still voting for legislation even though Scott Brown is the Senator from Massachusetts.  Brown won't be sworn in until Feb. 11th, so don't be surprised if they try to jam something reallly offensive through before then.

How exactly will repealing the Bush tax cuts on our small business owners and allowing the SEC to impose new regulations requiring companies to disclose potential risk to investors due to environmental regulations increase job growth and profitability?  Oh, I forgot - uncertainty and heavy taxation are the linchpins for a booming economy and low unemployment.

Those are just my top five questions so far this week.  I'm sure I will have many more before the week is out.

Hey, one more just struck me - why does Obama want Congress to rush the budget through, when it won't be effective until Sept. 2010?

Isn't it amazing how, with all of the spin explaining going on, there are still so many unanswered questions?

IBD/TIPP SHOCKER

Proving they have the tenacity and single-mindedness of a pit bull, the Obama administration is once again trying to rally the troops to pass ObamaCare. There is a full court press going on right now, but the ACORN scandal has sucked all the oxygen out of the room, so little attention is being paid to reports like this stunning IBD/TIPP poll.

The administration insists that there will be no rationing of care (death panels, if you prefer Palinese). Even with every doctor and nurse practicing now, there will most definitely be rationing when 47 million (or is it 30 million - the numbers keep changing) are added to the insurance rolls. This will not cut down on emergency room visits - one of the many reasons health care is so costly - just the opposite, actually. It will take months to see a general practitioner, so people will instead prefer to spend hours waiting their turn at the ER.

The IBD poll, showing a full 45% of our doctors would retire upon adoption of ObamaCare, proves adoption will put us immediately into crisis. This country already has a nursing crisis, as well as a shortage of general practitioners, and that crisis will become a catastrophe if what the IBD poll predicts will happen really does.

This poll is remarkably damaging to ObamaCare, so it is no surprise that it is getting little play. The poll finds many results in complete opposition to what the administration - and the AMA, for that matter - has been saying:

• More than seven in 10 doctors, or 71% — the most lopsided response in the poll — answered "no" when asked if they believed "the government can cover 47 million more people and that it will cost less money and the quality of care will be better."
• Two-thirds, or 65%, of doctors say they oppose the proposed government expansion plan. This contradicts the administration's claims that doctors are part of an "unprecedented coalition" supporting a medical overhaul.
• Four of nine doctors, or 45%, said they "would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement" if Congress passes the plan the Democratic majority and White House have in mind.

The American Medical Association (AMA) has been cheer leading the efforts of the Obama administration, including lobbying and advertising to sway public opinion. However, the AMA only represents about 18% of doctors, and has been losing support amongst those still members of the organization. The public view has been that doctors are behind ObamaCare, but nothing could be further from the truth.

None of this information seems to have slowed the ObamaCare express one iota, which is truly troubling. The purpose of this plan was to help the American people who have no health coverage. The result of the plan will be that even more people will be unable to access a doctor when they need one. And yet, the administration still plows ahead, even when the experts, practicing doctors, tell them it is a mistake.

Just this fact alone makes one wonder - even though it is becoming more and more clear that this plan will do more harm than good to the country, both economically and in terms of quality and quantity of care, why is the administration so adamant to pass it?

Seems to me to have more to do with power over one-sixth of the American economy than caring for the American people.

But, if the opinion of doctors in the field doesn't matter, what does my lowly opinion mean?

Good thing there are a few million other voices joining mine, and, with the downfall of ACORN imminent, a midterm election turnover is looking better and better. If congress doesn't pass a health care bill by November, it most likely won't pass at all, because they will be too busy campaigning to keep their seats next year.

After all, re-election is far more important than forwarding the business of the country, and, for once, that will work in our favor!

BATTLING THE HYDRA

The ACORN video scandal is picking up speed. Today, the House voted to defund the organization, which is following on the heels of the Senate vote two days ago. Now we need a combined bill that can be sent to the President to sign. I'll be interested in the reaction by ACORN if that happens.

Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL) scurries like a cockroach from being questioned about his ACORN vote by Fox News. I foresee a lot of scurrying in the coming months! I wonder how many on the Hill are popping Xanax like Tic-Tacs these days....I know these developments have put a major damper on re-election efforts for many democrats. If I had a say in things, I would investigate the 7 senators and 75 congresspeople who voted against defunding, to see how closely they are tied to ACORN. But, considering our 111th Congress won't even launch an investigation into Rangel's well documented misdeeds, I'm pretty sure they won't look into congressional ACORN ties.

CA Governator Schwarzenegger has called for a statewide investigation into ACORN, along with MN Governor Pawlenty. No comment from NY Governor Paterson, but at least his Attorney General, Cuomo, is on the ball. Interesting how there are no calls for investigations in Maryland or D.C., where it all started - well, aside from a call to investigate the journalists.

All of this bruhaha over the housing branch has overshadowed the original investigations on ACORN - the voter registration investigations. There are investigations ongoing in 14 states, but the one to keep an eye on is the one in Nevada. Where, interestingly enough, Harry Reid is tanking in the polls. Huh. What are the odds? Anyway, in Nevada, they are taking the allegations of a '21 Club' very seriously. Their investigation looks to be the first to go to trial, and will be a test case for the others.

But what about the rest? ACORN is closely tied to over 200 other organizations, such as CCI, which is the funnel that pours taxpayer dollars into the money laundering machine that is ACORN. In a report by Republican investigators to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, they state:

""Operationally, ACORN is a shell game played in 120 cities, 43 states and the District of Columbia through a complex structure designed to conceal illegal activities, to use taxpayer and tax-exempt dollars for partisan political purposes, and to distract investigators," the report said. Structurally, it is "a chess game in which senior management is shielded from accountability by multiple layers of volunteers and compensated employees who serve as pawns to take the fall for every bad act.""

ACORN is like the Hydra of Greek mythology. When you cut off one part of the organization, two more step up to take it's place. Cut off funding to one area, and it will draw money from another. Hercules finally defeated the Hydra by cauterizing the stumps after he cut off the heads. That is what we need to do, and our government has taken up the firebrand by voting, in both houses, to cut off funding. The states are starting to fight back, too, but there needs to be a comprehensive attack on all branches of ACORN and all of its affiliates with a combination of investigation and defunding.

ACORN is trying to get out in front of this scandal by implementing their own 'investigation', in hopes that it will keep anyone else from doing it. This must not be allowed to be the only investigation of ACORN. This is a classic case of the fox guarding the hen house.

There are over 200 heads on this hydra, so the job won't be easy or quick, but it must be done.

The beast is wounded; now is the time to finish it off.