Since I took the day off after class to go see “Where the Wild Things Are” with Kayla and her daughter, I don’t have a brilliant and insightful response to President Obama yet, but imma cookin’ somethin’ up. Until then, here’s a concise and amusing response from Jim Geraghty.
But probably my favorite part was Justice Samuel Alito mouthing “that’s not true” in regards to Obama’s criticism of Citizens United v. FEC. According to a pundit on Fox News, Justice Alito is this year’s winner of the “Joe Wilson Award.” Well good for him!
A good, swift kick in the balls every so often lets you remember how much getting kicked in the balls really hurts.
Have it good,
Well isn’t this is a very interesting proposition for Republicans. Do we go and support the President on an issue we basically agree with and lend him an appearance of bipartisan support and agreement (just in time for the 2010 elections I’m sure) or leave him out to dry and watch the Democrats self-destruct on their own?
The problem I have with President Obama’s intended proposal is that he leaves out so many things that desperately need to be addressed, such as military spending and that other massive elephant in the room called entitlement spending. Which leads me to believe that this is a half-hearted attempt to look more in-tune with the majority of the country than he actually is.
So what is the right way to go for conservatives? How about taking a cautious approach, fully realizing and applauding the high priority and importance of such a spending freeze in these tough economic times, but acknowledging that it is just one step on the long path towards fiscal responsibility. I agree with this section from HotAir:
Republicans need to make that point very clear and argue that while a freeze is the first step, the next step must be to roll back those federal-budget increases back to at least 2007 levels in order to actually impact the budget deficit, let alone long-term debt. That will require significant cuts in federal programs that Democrats created or inflated over the last three years while having control of the pursestrings.
That’s right, we don’t just want a freeze, we want a spending freeze followed by a spring spending thaw that will let us drain the proverbial spending lake. If that’s too confusing a metaphor, all you need to know is that a spending freeze is not the end we’re looking for as fiscal conservatives. We’re looking for a decrease in government, a rollback, a cut, whatever you want to call it.
Ok, here’s one – we’re going to prune the frozen tree of spending after the shining Republican victories in 2010.
I just can’t speak in metaphor, can I? haha.
Have it good,
So after weeks of shutting the Republicans out, negotiating in closed sessions to hammer out a disaster of a healthcare bill, lying about transparency and giving the cold shoulder to anyone disagreeing with the heavy-handed steamroller that is the Democratic party, this is what we get?
Sorry champ, too little too late.
Have it good,
I’ve been reading more and more about the constitutionality of this massive healthcare reform bill in the news and blogs over the last few weeks, but it seems like the idea has really taken off in the last few days. One blogger I’m a big fan of is Josh Blackman, and he’s been blogging on the possible “Constitutional moment” that would occur if the SCOTUS actually decided to hear questions of constitutionality if the healthcare bill passes. He caught this article from The Hill before I did:
With Democrats in control of the White House and large majorities in the Senate and House, Republicans view the third branch of government as their last, best hope to limit Obama’s ambitious reform agenda.
“Since Democrats cut Republicans out of the healthcare negotiations in Congress, maybe the only way to have any input into the health bill is through litigation,” Bossie added.
This story is directly related to my last post about transparency and healthcare, as you can see from the second paragraph I quoted. The Dems have totally shut out the Republicans in their secretive efforts to force this bill through to the President, so what else can conservatives do other than win big in the 2010 mid-terms, as it looks like they might do? Top Democrats head for the exits
My pre-law advisor had us read a very interesting book dealing with whether or not the Courts are actually desirable and effective venues for any meaningful change in public policy, specifically the chapters on Race and Abortion. I think I might revisit that book briefly, to see if any parallels can be drawn with the HC debate.
Have it good,
Not that I needed one more reason to be disillusioned by President Obama’s lies and deceptions, here we go with another one. This is a campaign quote from Obama about what he would do to a debate on a healthcare bill.
Hell yes, on something this important open it up to the public! Or at least the opposing party!
Senate Democrat Harry Reid and House Democrat Nancy Pelosi are inclined to finish up the 2,500-plus-page legislation themselves behind closed doors, skipping the usual Senate-House conference committee that would include those pesky Republicans.
I admit, I am a bit of a nerd when it comes to C-SPAN so I agree with televising these healthcare negotiations just so I can have something to watch at 6am on a no-sleep night. And if it weren’t for C-Span, where would the majority of Jon Stewart’s hilarious political clips come from?
Let C-SPAN in! Let this much-lauded “bi-partisanship” the Democrats speak of show its head! Or does that trick only work when they’re in the minority and need an excuse to influence policy?
Have it good and open,