Save Your Rights » Nancy Pelosi

Our Dire Straits…

admin — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 09:06:25 +0000

This is an incisive political parody using the Dire Straits song “Money for Nothing”. It correctly notes that we are too busy with mindless superficialities of life and hedonism to notice or even attempt to protest or oppose the government's increasing control and restrictions over our lives regarding freedoms, rights and choices and confiscation of our wealth.

Ironically and appropriately, the group’s name is descriptive of the present conditions in our country.

Money for Nothing

Incompetent and Arrogant Congressional Democrats Continue To Imposed Failed and Reckless Policies

admin — Tue, 06 Jul 2010 09:00:55 +0000

Oblivious to historical equivalents, benighted and belligerent, Obama and Congressional Democrats fervently continue to pursue and implement disastrous policies on the American public which will have apocalyptic effects on our country.

It seems to be an unimaginable possibility to have so many incompetent, arrogant and uninformed people in one place. Unfortunately, they are the ones passing and imposing irresponsible and reckless legislation.

The Last Refuge Of The Incompetent
Investors Business Daily 07/01/2010

Unemployment checks, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday with a straight face, create jobs "faster than almost any other initiative you can name." AP

Leadership: With their own economic policies in complete disarray, Democrats have turned to a tried-and-true tactic: Blame the opposition for your failure. It may be too late — their incompetence is starting to show.

Recent events, along with the continued bleeding of the U.S. economy and Wall Street, underscore the desperation of the party in power to escape responsibility for its failures.

Case in point: The president, speaking in Wisconsin on Wednesday, lashed out at Republicans: "We already tried the other side's ideas. We already know where their theories led us. And now we have a choice as a nation."

We must have missed the Democrats' attempt to enact broad-based tax cuts, for instance, to boost the economy like they did each time they've been tried in the past. Truth is, "the other side's ideas" have been studiously ignored in our financial crisis and recession.

Unemployment remains close to 9.7% and, based on even White House estimates, is unlikely to improve much. Vice President Joe Biden himself has noted that, under current Democratic policies, "there's no possibility to restore 8 million jobs lost in the Great Recession."

Of course, he too blames the GOP, though his party has controlled Congress since 2006 and its earlier policies, such as the Community Reinvestment Act and the creation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, were responsible for the 2007-08 financial meltdown.

Democrats like to style themselves as the party of the little guy. But small businesses are going bankrupt in droves while unemployment among black males is averaging 16.3% — well above last year's 14.8%. In March, 1.8 million African-American men were without work — the most on record.

Now we see signs the economy's improvement may soon stall — and perhaps even slide backwards. On Thursday, we learned that June auto sales dropped 4.3% while May pending home sales plunged 30%. Consumer confidence has fallen sharply, and financial markets are in a tailspin.

Also this week, the Congressional Budget Office reported that federal debt by year-end will soar to 62% of GDP — highest since World War II, when the U.S. went deeply into the red and killed off the private economy in order to beat the Nazis.

Worse, the CBO said debt will hit 87% of GDP by 2020, rise above its record peak of 109% by 2025 and hit a stunning — and financially ruinous — 185% by 2035.

CBO chief Doug Elmendorf told the White House's deficit commission this week that those rising levels of debt, fueled by uncontrolled federal spending, might lead to "higher interest rates, more foreign borrowing, less private investment and lower income growth, if not a full-blown fiscal crisis."

While there's been modest job growth this year, business groups such as the Chamber of Commerce and Business Roundtable warn that government policies of higher taxes and big spending will squeeze future private-business sales.

Without private-sector growth, there will be no recovery and no sustained rebound in job creation. Compassion for the little guy comes from understanding this very simple point — not from pointing fingers and mouthing vacuous economic platitudes.

The fact is, $700 billion in TARP bailouts, $862 billion in economic "stimulus," $70 billion in auto industry aid, $1.2 trillion in Fed money-printing and $146 billion spent on bailing out insolvent government mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have done nothing to restore our economy's vigor.

This is among the most incompetent series of economic policy moves in U.S. history — all the more unforgivable because similar Keynesian pump-priming was tried during the Great Depression and in the 1970s, failing miserably each time.

On Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said unemployment checks create "jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name."
We are not making this up. This is what passes for economic wisdom in the Democratic Party.

The current mess is a result of policies in place now — not those put in place years ago. Watching this nightmare unfold, and then listening to our leaders blame the opposition, is getting more grotesque by the day.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/539183/201007011901/The-Last-Refuge-Of-The-Incompetent.aspx

http://www.investors.com/image/Web_IssuesPelosi0702.jpg.cms

America’s Present Government: A Kleptocracy

admin — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 09:06:23 +0000

Obamacare is Quintessential Socialism and It Must Be Rescinded

admin — Thu, 20 May 2010 09:00:44 +0000

In the 1950’s, Ronald Reagan warned us that health care could be used as a means to introduce and implement socialism. His words were quite prescient.

Though the public was and is vehemently against government run health care, the Obama Administration, Pelosi and Reid used bribery of corrupt politicians, and threats, lies or disingenuous arguments with feckless other in order to acquire enough votes to pass the legislation.

Again this was done in spite of overwhelming sentiment by the public against socialized medicine. It was a coup by a power hungry and ideologically driven government that disdains its citizens.

Now it is our turn …!

Obamacare Equals Socialism on Steroids
David Limbaugh May 13, 2010

We knew Obama was prevaricating when he told us his purpose to cram through Obamacare was to provide universal access to coverage and reduce costs, but how many people did he manage to fool? How many are still fooled?

He repeatedly complained that America spent more on healthcare than other nations "but wasn't any healthier." He grossly distorted the numbers of chronically uninsured. He lied about his support for a single-payer plan and in denying that the "public option" was a Trojan horse for such a plan. He misled us concerning his intention to federally fund abortions and the coverage of illegals.

He deceitfully insisted that he wouldn't interfere with the patient-doctor relationship, that patients could choose to keep their own plans, that his plan wouldn't lead to rationing and that it would increase the quality of care.

Perhaps his most cynical fraud was his line that he would not sign a bill that would add one single dime to the federal deficit. Along with the uninsured canard, this was his biggest selling point for Obamacare: Healthcare costs were skyrocketing, and he had the magic bullet to remedy that.

Well, we already have objective proof (courtesy of a delinquent Congressional Budget Office pronouncement) that this, too, was a lie.

Obama and congressional Democrats moved budgetary mountains (in the way David Copperfield moves mountains onstage) to create the CBO-supported illusion that his bill wouldn't increase federal budget deficits.

By asking the CBO to make absurd assumptions and by borrowing from other mythical funds (Medicare), Obamacrats were finally able to make the numbers balance, just long enough to give Obama cover to sign the bill.

But less than two months after he signed the bill into law, the CBO, in response to Rep. Jerry Lewis' request for a rescoring based on realistic assumptions instead of the bogus ones Democrats submitted, has already admitted its estimate didn't take into account "discretionary" expenditures that will add some $115 billion worth of costs.

With the publication of this news, the administration is now making noise, threatening not to fund the bill unless Congress finds sufficient savings elsewhere to nullify that "unexpected" cost increase.

Give me a break. Just how stupid can these people think we are? They knew about these false assumptions before Obama signed the bill, and they're not about to withdraw their wholesale endorsement for Obama's crowning legislative "achievement."

But as bad as Obama's lies were about the costs of his plan, many of us warned that a greater evil in Obamacare was its guaranteed path to reducing our freedoms.

Ronald Reagan was not just issuing platitudes when he said, "One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project . . . From here, it's a short step to all the rest of socialism."

No truer words were ever spoken, and you can be sure that Obama believes it, too, which is exactly why he misrepresented almost every aspect of his plan in order to get it passed — and even then, just barely.

His real purpose, as many of us have been telling you ad nauseam, is to greatly increase the size and scope of government and government control and, in the process, further radically redistribute wealth. He's a socialist. These aren't just words. He really is.

As it turns out, we don't have to wait any longer to prove we were correct about this, too. Obama has nominated Donald Berwick to run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

I discovered in research on my upcoming book that experts believe that under Obamacare, the role of the CMS will be greatly expanded to define the quality of healthcare for every insurance plan, set reimbursement rates for physicians in Medicare and Medicaid, and decide how valuable certain treatments are.

According to Robert M. Goldberg of the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest, Berwick essentially "will get control of the practice of medicine."

It would be scary enough for a bureaucrat of normal sensibilities and saner politics to have such control, but RedState has uncovered the extent of Berwick's radicalism — like so many of Obama's other appointees.

Berwick is an Ivy League academic who loves wealth redistribution and believes that healthcare is an ideal vehicle to achieve it.

Berwick said: "Any healthcare funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized, and humane must . . . redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent healthcare is by definition redistributional."

Berwick also lusts after the British system of socialized medicine, saying that America's healthcare system runs in the "darkness of private enterprise."

How much more proof do people need about Obama?

http://www.newsmax.com/Limbaugh/Obama-Obamacare-healthcare-public/2010/05/13/id/358958

Nancy Pelosi Touting Free Healthcare To Some To Be Paid By The Rest of Us.

admin — Tue, 18 May 2010 09:03:17 +0000

Pelosi to Aspiring Musicians: Quit Your Job, Taxpayers Will Cover Your Health Care


Sounds like socialism … er, communism as in communist Russia of the 1970’s. 
We need to stop this transfer of wealth and killer of motivation and productivity which enslaves working individuals and forces them to pay for those who are not contributing.



Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) Suggests Impeachment of Nancy Pelosi
admin — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:01:28 +0000
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has been a resolute and outspoken critic of Obama and his policies and the actions of the Democrat controlled Congress. Outraged by the immoral, depraved and illegal actions of Nancy Pelosi, she has suggested that her impeachment would be an appropriate action.
We must show Michele Bachmann our support and appreciation for her unwavering dedication and willingness to vigorously stand up for the American people against a hostile Congress and vindictive, scathing press by sending letters and e-mails.
Bachmann Rips Media for Not Covering Deem and Pass; Suggests Pelosi Impeachment Warranted

By Jeff Poor     03/17/2010
The latest maneuvering by congressional Democrats to make their brand of health care reform a reality has a lot of Washington, D.C. insiders scratching their heads and unable to forecast what is around the bend when it comes to this legislation.
But have the media completely dropped the ball and that is allowing those in power to circumvent constitutional process? According to Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., they have. She had some harsh words for the fourth estate on conservative talker Sean Hannity's March 16 radio show.
"Well yeah and the other thing is treason media," Bachmann said. "Where is the mainstream media in all of this not telling this story? This is a compelling story - that the Speaker of the House would even consider having us pass a bill that no one votes on?"
According to Bachmann, this is such an egregious maneuver by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, to force through health care reform using the Slaughter Rule, as known as deem and pass , that it warrants her impeachment from the post.
"That should laugh her out of the House and there should be people that are calling for impeachment off of something like this," Bachmann continued. "That's how bad this is. I mean, trust me - Dennis Hastert could have never gotten away with this. President Bush never could have gotten away with it."
But if anything, Bachmann contended this could be a teachable moment in civics for the country. She explained this is what happens when a one-party dominant rule occurs - an abuse of power and the trampling of the United States Constitution.
"And that's why this is a very useful example to all of us about growing up and being serious and knowing how valuable and important our country is and the value of election," Bachmann said. "That's what we've learned about the value of this last election with one-party dominance and rule. And this is how they view our most precious, sacred document - the Constitution? They're going to ignore it? No."
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeff-poor/2010/03/17/bachmann-rips-media-not-covering-deem-and-pass-suggests-pelosi-impeachmen




Corruptocrats Reach New Low In Attempts To Pass Obamacare Without True Vote
admin — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:01:08 +0000
It is difficult if not impossible to find a period of time in our history where our government is as corrupt and hell-bent on abrogating the freedoms and rights of its citizens. This is the anathema of a one party rule without countervailing opposition. What we are witnessing is a revolution by corrupt and unconstitutional legislation perpetrated by “our” government which must be stopped.
The next few days are the most critical for all of us. We urge you to call, e-mail and fax Senators and Representatives across the country and give them a piece of your mind. Then in November, these corruptocrats need to be ousted wholesale.
Not Even A Vote?! 

Investors Business Daily   03/16/2010
Health Reform: Using a parliamentary trick ironically known as the "self-executing rule," Democrats plan on passing their massive health bill without voting. In November, they'll learn just how "self-executing" it was.
Just when you thought Washington couldn't get more corrupt, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi this week seems intent on trampling representative government itself. Unable to get the votes to pass their U.S. health care revolution, she and her fellow Democratic leaders have figured out a way to pass it without a vote.
The "self-executing rule" has been "used to adopt concurrent resolutions correcting the enrollment of measures or to make other technical changes to legislation," according to the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress.
It's "a two-for-one procedure," as the CRS describes it, because the House of Representatives always must pass a rule, written by the House Rules Committee (where Democrats hold a 9-to-4 majority), setting the terms of debate on a particular piece of legislation. In this case, it's been rigged so that if the rule passes, the legislation passes too.
The trick has been used before, as cited by the CRS, on obscure measures like the prohibition of smoking on airline flights in 1989, an employee verification program regarding illegal aliens in 1996, the blocking of the use of statistical sampling for the 2000 census until federal courts could determine its constitutionality, and an IRS overhaul in 1997.
But never on anything approaching such landmark legislation.
Amy Ridenour, president of the National Center for Public Policy Research, is among a number of legal scholars who believe this Slaughter Solution, named after House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., "would stand a very good chance of being tossed out by the U.S. Supreme Court."
In the 1998 Clinton v. City of New York ruling on the line-item veto, liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for a 6-to-3 majority, "laid a likely road map for how the court might rule on a challenge to the constitutionality of the Slaughter Solution," according to Ridenour.
Stevens made note of "three procedural steps" that must be taken before a bill becomes law:  The "exact text" must be "approved by a majority of the members of the House of Representatives"; the Senate must approve "precisely the same text"; and the same text must be "signed into law by the president. The Constitution explicitly requires that each of those three steps be taken before a bill may become a law."
Indeed, Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution couldn't be clearer: "The votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively."
Michael McConnell, a former federal judge and director of Stanford University's Constitutional Law Center, writing in the Wall Street Journal this week, declared the trick unconstitutional because "this means that no single bill will have passed both houses in the same form." Talk radio host and Landmark Legal Foundation President Mark Levin warned of its use sparking "the greatest constitutional crisis since the Civil War."
The president, the speaker and the rest of those involved in one-party rule in Washington may think they know what's good for the American people better than the people do.
Do they also think they know better than the framers of the Constitution and their naive ideas of one man, one vote?
If anything could swell the ranks of the populist Tea Party movement and make it friendlier to Republican candidates this November, it's executing the "self-executing rule."
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=527493



Obama et al Are Willing To Go Down In Their Attempts To Destroy Our Healthcare System
admin — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 09:05:23 +0000




Democratic Leadership Will Stop At Nothing In Order to Pass Healthcare Reform
admin — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:00:05 +0000
The Democratic leadership has not ruled any tactics off limits in its quest to obtain enough votes necessary to pass their healthcare reform legislation. They have resorted to ad hominem attacks even on fellow Democrats, slander, threats, bribes, illegal or questionable parliamentary maneuvers and other corrupt deals.
All of this is being perpetrated despite a furious and rejecting American public who oppose Obamacare by nearly a 3:1 margin. The contemptuousness, elitism and arrogance of Obama, Pelosi, Reid and others is essentially unparalleled in American History.
These individuals must be stopped and Obamacare should never see the light of day. What these politicians are doing is facilitating a legislative theft of our rights, freedoms and wealth that may be permanent. It is a heinous scheme that is leading us closer to an ideological totalitarian regime under the guise of a “representative” government. 
House Democrat Takes On Party Leaders

Lee Ross     March 13, 2010
In a surprising and fascinating look at the behind-the-scenes negotiations of proposed health care legislation on Capitol Hill, a prominent Democrat says the actions of his party's leaders in recent days represents a "pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party."
If House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is holding out hope that Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) will replicate his "yes" vote on health care reform she can probably forget it. In a wide-ranging swipe at his party's leaders, Stupak told an interviewer that he is a definite "no" vote on a health care bill that is expected to reach the House floor next week.
A single vote could make the difference in the fate of the legislation but Stupak says other pro-life Democrats who had been part of his coalition fighting for specific language on abortion funding have given up the fight. "It's almost like some right-to-life members don't want to be bothered. They just want this over," Stupak told National Review's Robert Costa in an article [1]published on-line Friday. If that's the case, Democratic leaders may be able to prevail without Stupak's support.
The Michigan Democrat's vitriol for House leaders shines a bright light on the normally secret negotiations. "They're ignoring me," Stupak asserts while concluding that the final bill will not have the stronger abortion-related language that he's long supported and was able to force in the first bill the House passed late last year.
"[E]ven if they don't have the votes, it's been made clear to us that they won't insert our language on the abortion issue," Stupak says.   "I really believe that the Democratic leadership is simply unwilling to change its stance. Their position says that women, especially those without means available, should have their abortions covered."
Stupak offers an interesting take on why party leaders don't want his effort to succeed.  "If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That's one of the arguments I've been hearing," Stupak says. "Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue - come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we're talking about."
Stupak believes that if a final health care bill passes without strong language on abortion funding, it will effectively freeze out pro-life Democrats in the future. He says he will remain a Democrat but predicts that any effort to change the abortion language would have to wait "until the Republicans take back the majority to fix this."  You read that right, a Democrat looking forward to a Republican take-over of Congress!
Stupak's prominence and apparent resolve on this issue has increased the political heat on the nine-term Democrat.   "This has really reached an unhealthy stage," Stupak says. "People are threatening ethics complaints on me. On the left, they're really stepping it up. Every day, from Rachel Maddow to the Daily Kos, it keeps coming. Does it bother me? Sure. Does it change my position? No."
A Friday posting on Daily Kos has this headline: "Women ROAR BACK against Stupak/Pitts!" It targets Stupak and Congressman Joe Pitts (R-PA) and is a fundraising appeal for Stupak's primary challenger. "If you were pissed when Joe Wilson shouted YOU LIE at President Obama I want you to channel that same sort of anger and aim it in support of Connie Saltonstall..."
Earlier this week, MSNBC's Maddow took direct aim at Stupak saying his efforts were designed to do nothing more than get him on television. "Abortion rights only for rich ladies. That's Bart Stupak's principled crusade," Maddow said.
Stupak does not name names in his attack on party leaders but in a radio interview Thursday, Stupak recounted a conversation he had with House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA), a central figure in the health care debate. Stupak said Waxman told him that Democratic leaders "want to pay for abortions."  In a statement to Fox News, Waxman said “My position has been clear and consistent.  I do not believe health reform should be used to change current law, which prohibits federal funds from paying for abortion.”
http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/03/13/house-democrat-takes-on-party-leaders/



Obama Will Do Whatever It Takes To Pass Healthcare Reform
admin — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 09:05:48 +0000