If you need evidence of the turmoil created by Barack Obama’s socialist health care overhaul, you could certainly look at the myriad of legal challenges currently working their way through the courts. (A date with the Supreme Court is a certainty.) Or you could look at the massive influx of applications from unions and companies scrambling to get out from under the law’s oppressive requirements by obtaining waivers from the Obama administration.

The Obama Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently announced an arbitrary September 2011 cutoff for waiver applications, but right up to this deadline these exemptions continue to proliferate. According to The Hill, 106 new waivers were granted in July, bringing the total to 1,472 unions and companies that have been granted exemptions from Obamacare. And yet, the Obama administration continues to be super secretive regarding just how these waiver applications are evaluated.

But here’s one thing we do know. Approximately 50% of the waivers granted cover employees of unions even though union workers represent about 12% of the total workforce according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics!

Why are unions seemingly getting a disproportionate number of waivers? That’s just one of many questions at the center of a Judicial Watch investigation.

Recently, for example, we obtained 3,497 pages of Obamacare documents from the Obama HHS pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed on January 4, 2011.

(more…)

Wow. Not even a pretense of caring about fiscal responsibility. Keep the status quo, even if it means America is doomed to suffer a Greek-style budget meltdown.

Those were my thoughts when I heard that Harry Reid appointed Senators Kerry, Murray, and Baucus to the “super committee” created by the debt limit bill.

And then I was similarly stunned when Nancy Pelosi picked Representatives Clyburn, Becerra, and Van Hollen.

If you wanted to select the six most doctrinaire statists in Congress, you’d be hard pressed to come up with a different list. To understand just how left wing they are, here’s a chart showing their 2010 ratings from the National Taxpayers Union. They all had the same grade – a big fat F. And that is rather remarkable since NTU grades on a big curve. A score of 19 is all it takes to get a D.

For purposes of comparison, I’ve also added a line indicating Senator Ted Kennedy’s lifetime rating. He got an F, of course, but his average rating was higher than every single one of the big-government clowns named by Reid and Pelosi.

As I said earlier, wow.

(more…)

Just minutes after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) tabled (read: killed) the second piece of legislation presented by the House to his chamber addressing solutions to the politically manufactured debt ceiling “crisis” – legislation crafted through not only bipartisan negotiations among members of the House, but bipartisan consultation with Senate members – Mr. Reid had the unmitigated gall to infer that Republicans were being “obstructionist.”

As reported in the Washington Times:

“Republicans offered to let the vote happen Friday night, just minutes after the chamber voted to halt a House Republican bill. All sides expect Democrats’ bill will fail too, and the GOP said senators might as well kill both at the same time so that negotiations could move on to a compromise.

“‘We would be happy to have that vote tonight,’ Sen. Mitch McConnell, Republicans’ leader, offered.

“But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid objected, even though the vote would occur on his own bill. He instead said the chamber would have to run out the full procedural clock, which means a vote in the early hours Sunday morning.

“He said he would be willing to move up the vote if Republicans didn’t insist on a 60-vote threshold, which has become traditional for big, controversial items to pass the Senate. But the GOP held firm on that demand, so Mr. Reid said he would insist on the full process, which he said would show the country that Republicans were being obstructionist.”

At a time when the American people are screaming – nay, demanding – that those elected to office in Washington stop with the political positioning and gamesmanship, Progressive Democrat Harry Reid, a man whose approval rating is just 27 percent, whose negatives stand at 53 percent, a man whose last election was handed to him not by the people of Nevada but by the union members of Las Vegas, represents the quintessential example of exactly the kind of behavior Americans detest.

(more…)

As we tick-tock toward August 2nd, the day President Obama and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner have set as the day the Executive Branch will have to start prioritizing expenditures – establishing what programs are covered exclusively by actual tax revenue and not borrowed money, we approach an artificial deadline for a secondary issue created by a much more systemic national malady. Where the news media and elected officials argue, whine and mislead on the issue of raising the federal debt limit ceiling, the debt ceiling isn’t even close to the issue that all inside the beltway, but for the TEA Party, are refusing to address seriously: overspending.

Many on the Left side of the aisle have been caught rationalizing the need to raise the debt ceiling by noting it has been raised 78 times since 1960 – 49 times under Republican presidents, and 29 times under Democrat presidents, an irrelevant attribution due to the fact that Congress holds the power of the purse, not the Executive Branch. In fact, if one wants to split hairs about which party has presided over the majority of debt ceiling raises, and, consequently, which party has presided over the most deficit spending, it would be more accurate to point out that Democrats, from 1960 to 2010, have held the majorities in the Senate for 36 years and the House for 41 years. Ergo, Democrats and Progressives are far more to blame than Republicans for bringing the nation to the precipice of financial ruin.

Truth be told, both sides of the aisle are to blame for spending beyond their means, the honest man – or woman – recognizes and acknowledges that Congress has been spending more than it takes in for generations, whether under Republican leadership or Democrat leadership. That said, our nation would be infinitely better served if the news media and the elected class abandoned the blame game and political gimmicks – something that Progressives and especially Pres. Obama are not wont to do, to focus on the urgent need for them to commit to balancing the budget.
(more…)

A good friend of mine, David Jeffers of The Aletheia Group, sent out a message last night almost directly after President Obama finished his speech to the American public regarding the debt ceiling. His message was titled “Obamaocchio,” and, in light of what Mr. Obama and his Administration have been telling bankers behind closed doors about this issue, appropriate.

Even as President Obama and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner take to the airwaves (as it were) to trumpet that the economic sky will fall if Congress does not reach a deal to raise the debt ceiling; to give the federal government the ability to amass more foreign debt, both Mr. Obama and Mr. Geithner – and their dispatches – have been reassuring the financial sector that they have no intention of allowing the United States government to “default” on its debt, regardless of whether Congress raises the debt ceiling or not.

A senior banking official admitted to receiving “guidance” from the Obama Administration insisting that “default is off the table.” This should be the catalyst for a great deal of anger; anger emanating from those who receive Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid payments, not to mention anyone whose investments have been held in limbo for all the uncertainty surrounding the debt ceiling issue.

(more…)

Regardless of where you stand on the budget debate the most fascinating result has been the undeniable realization that President Obama has been marginalized and is now fighting for a seat at the table. I believe it is a first in my lifetime that a sitting President has been removed from any political debate not to mention one as serious as our budget. It was made clear when Boehner left the White House over the weekend and said he would work with the Congress to fashion a solution. There can be no question that Boehner’s political skills and Obama’s lack of them created this vacuum. The son of a bar tender has outperformed the Professor; it renews my confidence in our system of Government.

Cowboys know a lot about life. For instance they know that as soon as you think you know everything about horses and you can control them, you get hurt. The same is true of power and President Obama has been intoxicated with ego and power from the time he entered the White House, dictating his demands to a Democratic Party that was stunned into subservience by a victory that could not be explained. Most important is that the President believed in his own invulnerability. Only recently have the facts emerged. David Border writing for the Post in an August 9, 2010 article entitled “Senate as Civil as Ever, We’re Told” that Senate Minority Leader Mitch Mc Connell was first invited for a one on one with the President one year and seven months after Obama took office.

In recent weeks Time Magazine stated that the White House didn’t have Boehner’s phone number which was later confirmed by Stephanopoulos on ABC News that a top aid to the President didn’t know Boehner the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives. These are truly amazing revelations when you think back on the relationships that Presidents have had with members of their opposing parties. Reagan with Tip O’ Neil and Rostenkowski. Clinton with Newt Gingrich. While these Presidents fought with leaders of the opposite party, sometimes publically, they respected and knew one another well.

(more…)

The Obama Administration, Congressional Progressives and Democrats, and the mainstream media have done a fantastic job of controlling the narrative in the debt ceiling/budget debate. They have hammered home, in an almost Goebbels-esque manner, the false notion that Republicans have not “compromised on their partisan ideals”; that the GOP is, to use their talking point, “intransigent.” This is nothing short of exactly the opposite from the truth.

The fact of the matter is that House Speaker John Boehner, and a majority of the House and Senate Republican contingents, have compromised, and have done so on a major issue: raising the debt ceiling.

Looking back on the 2010 Mid-Term Election, those concerned about the fiscal irresponsibility executed by our elected class stated loud and clear, in the only poll that matters – the poll at the ballot box, that we wanted the federal government to employ fiscal restraint. In many cases, those whose names were on the ballot, indicated that they finally – finally – got the message. Even Harry Reid (D-NV), ran on a platform that included support for a balanced budget amendment. They said time and time again, at rallies and fundraisers that they understood that the American people were demanding dramatically reduced spending, an honest effort to reduce debt and an abdication of status quo partisan politics, at least until the country’s fiscal health was on the mend.

Fast-Forward to today.

The elected class on the Left side of the aisle, but for a very few, have once again exhibited the status quo Janus face of political skullduggery.

(more…)

Walking into Miss B’s Café in Louisburg, KS you join farmers, cattlemen and cowboys. It is a throwback to a time when the local community would gather around a table and talk to one another about local, state and national issues over a hot cup of coffee and a sumptuous breakfast. On the Saturday after the budget compromise I ventured back to that institution to listen to the heart of America expecting to hear appreciation for the Congress and Administration avoiding a government shut down. Instead I learned of the depth of discontent with a political system that seems to be out of touch with its people.

I, for one was impressed with the compromise for several reasons. First, spending was cut by the largest amount in the history of this Country. Granted, it is only a cut of the increase in spending of this Administration and the previous Congress but it is significant that it came when the Administration and remnants of that Congress pledged that there would not only be no cuts, but another increase in spending. Moreover this was punctuated when the President and Majority Leader of the Senate then tried to take credit for the compromise. Not only did that effort fail with the majority of Americans but it angered the stalwarts of their party who have accused them of being spineless.

Secondly, it is apparent that Congressman Boehner was the engineer of the compromise and it was his leadership that made the result possible. For most of us, our introduction to the Congressman was his tearful statements when the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives. I was hopeful that he was as sincere as his delivery, but admittedly too jaded to believe it. His success is not only a testament that those deep feels he gushed were sincere but that he is now a proven leader.

Finally, I was impressed with Boehner’s generosity toward the Tea Party, giving them credit for being a big part of the solution. It is unusual for any politician to give others credit, especially those outside of their loyal party. And regardless of what the press says, the Tea Party is outside the Republican and Democratic Party. Instead as was the case with the President and Senate Majority Leader, they wanted to hijack the success of others.

So why all the dissatisfaction?

(more…)

After what seems like a decade’s worth of commercials, more talking head blather than should be allowed under the Geneva Conventions and spin enough to make even the most rabid rollercoaster fan nauseous, election 2010 is upon us. Any reading of the news would lead you to believe that Republicans will have a good night tomorrow and Democrats will learn nothing, unless your news source is MSNBC, in which case reread the “Democrats will learn nothing” part of this sentence. The disservice outlets like MSNBC and Huffington Post have done liberals is a column for another day, this one is about the election and what you should look for as results roll in tomorrow.

The Guessing Game

Just how many House seats Republicans win tomorrow is irrelevant, the only number that matters is 39. If Republicans win 39 more seats than they have today they will take control of the House and Nancy Pelosi returns to being as insignificant a factor in your life as the kid who sat next to you in 3^rd period French class your senior year in high school. You shared some times and even wrote “Keep in touch” in his yearbook, but you didn’t include your phone number so he actually could, and now he’s gone.

As soon as those 39 seats flip Nancy returns to being Minority Leader, a fate former Speakers of the House resign from faster than a call girl cancels a date on Charlie Sheen. But I digress.

Pundits are predicting historic numbers, up to 100 seats are in play, they say. Maybe they are, but it doesn’t matter, all that matters is 39. Predictions of 50 to 75 have not been uncommon in the last few weeks; if Republicans surpass those numbers the predictors will claim the “wave” was so big no one could have foreseen it, if they are close they will claim a clairvoyance not seen since the glory days of Miss Cleo. If they fall short, the story they will tell is one of a rejection of the Tea Party, of limited government, of Americans “coming to their senses,” a near-literal smearing of lamb’s blood on the door posts of Congress to ward off the 10^th plague of the 10^th Amendment. Don’t listen to them either way. All that matters is 39.

(more…)

The mainstream media–a group of people far to the left of the American public–are deeply concerned that the extremist tea party–a group of people whose ideals represent the American mainstream–are threatening the careers of centrist Democrats… who are extremists.

(more…)

This morning I had the opportunity to listen to a NAACP conference call that was organized to release its report highlighting alleged (yet unproven) Tea Party ties to racist groups. This conference call, report, and website reminded me very much of the quote from Shakespeare’s Macbeth, “A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

What was reiterated on the call by the NAACP and it’s minion of “progressive” allies was the same old, unproven, nonsensical charges against the strongest modern grass-roots movement in decades.

“The Tea Party used the N word against a Black Congressmen during the Healthcare Debate.” Indeed Ben Jealous, CEO of the NAACP had the audacity to reload this charge in spite of Andrew Breitbart’s $100,000.00 challenge to anybody that could document the occurrence and in spite of the Tea Party Federation’s unanswered challenge to the Congressional Black Caucus to have a joint investigation of the phony incident.

The most illuminating part of the call came when “progressive” ally, Larry Cohen of the CWA (Communication Workers of America) revealed the real agenda of the attacks on the Tea Party by the Left, “We disagree with the agenda of the tea party Movement… They advocate slavery,” and this classic gem, “We don’t need 19^th century capitalism.”

What this potpourri of “progressive” groups are really trying to do is inspire an uninspired liberal base of voters, days before the predicted November election bloodletting. (more…)

Every economic theory – even socialism and Marxism – agrees that long-run growth and higher living standards are closely tied to saving and investment (a.k.a., capital formation). Yet because of double taxation, the current tax code penalizes those who are willing to forego current consumption to finance future prosperity. In an ideal system such as a flat tax or national sales tax, by contrast, there is no tax bias against income that is saved and invested.

One of the most self-destructive forms of double taxation is the capital gains tax. The Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation has a superb three-part series on this issue, including studies on the economic impact of capital gains taxation, the impact of capital gains taxation on realizations (asset sales), and the grossly flawed revenue-estimating process used by the left to hinder good capital gains tax policy. For those seeking a faster introduction to the issue, this new Center for Freedom and Prosperity video explains why the capital gains tax should be abolished.

Unfortunately, Obama’s policies are steering America in the wrong direction. He wants to boost the official capital gains tax rate from 15 percent to 20 percent – and that is after imposing a back-door 3.8 percentage point increase in the tax rate as part of his government-run healthcare scheme. This is in addition to his other class-warfare proposals to impose higher tax rates on investors and entrepreneurs. If he succeeds, the American economy will suffer. Here are the six reasons outlined in the video why the capital gains tax is misguided:

1. Less investment – This is simple economics. If you make future consumption more expensive relative to current consumption with the tax code, people will respond by saving and investing less.

(more…)

Last week, Andrew Breitbart sat down with David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network and articulated his position that the media is the primary adversary to those fighting for traditional American values.

Watch the whole thing: you’re sure to enjoy when Andrew discusses that while the New Media may well save the Republic (and perhaps the world), it has already saved him personally.

The Brody File show airs tonight on the CBN Newschannel.

A full profile of Andrew Breitbart will air on The 700 Club show May 13th.

Some highlights/discussion points below:

“By aiming everything at the media, I’ve pretty much done the one thing they ask you not to do: ‘please accept the premise that we’re fair and let’s move on.’ No, I’m not going to accept that premise.” (more…)

You mean if we don’t add a trillion dollars to the deficit then the country will … go … bankrupt?

Is it Opposite Day?

President Obama told ABC News’ Charles Gibson in an interview that if Congress does not pass health care legislation that will bring down costs, the federal government “will go bankrupt.”

The president laid out a dire scenario of what will happen if his health care reform effort fails.

“If we don’t pass it, here’s the guarantee….your premiums will go up, your employers are going to load up more costs on you,” he said. “Potentially they’re going to drop your coverage, because they just can’t afford an increase of 25 percent, 30 percent in terms of the costs of providing health care to employees each and every year. “

The president said that the costs of Medicare and Medicaid are on an “unsustainable” trajectory and if there is no action taken to bring them down, “the federal government will go bankrupt.”

(more…)

Either Thursday or later this week, Senate Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev) wants the Senate to vote on a “motion to proceed” on the Senate’s version of the healthcare bill. That wouldn’t be so bad except for the fact that it has barely been seen by anyone in the Senate. At least not as far as most Senators are concerned. Why is that? Because the bill has not been shown to them with sufficient time to study it, that’s why.

What Reid wants is for the Senate to vote to proceed on a bill that has not been seen, not read, not studied by the very Senators from whom he wants to force a vote. If this bill is so important, why isn’t it imperative that our Senators actually get to see the thing they are expected to vote on?

(more…)