ObamaCare Repeal Vote Not Showcase Or Futile

The House vote repealing ObamaCare sends a significant message across America – the high court got this one wrong. Most Americans understand the only way to correct this injustice is to repeal the health care law. Image Credit: ACLJ.com  

ObamaCare Repeal Vote Not Showcase Or Futile

The Liberal Media take on the House of Representatives vote of 244-185 vote to repeal the ObamaCare health care law is that it's a "dog and pony" show. It is a futile attempt that will go nowhere as it faces certain demise in the Democrat-controlled Senate, and that this effort represents the 33rd time the House has gone to this well ... but there is a completely different take that few are articulating or, for that matter, shouting from the rooftops between now and the election in November.

Aside from the fact that this is only the second time that Congress has voted directly on the REPEAL of ObamaCare since the 2010 election, this passing vote lays down the marker of what most of the voting public wishes to see and that the only way to complete the process of REPEAL and REPLACE is to deliver a Senate and Executive Branch that are committed to vote for repeal as well.

Again, to be clear, with this affirmative vote for REPEAL, the House of Representatives are locked and loaded to kill this harmful law and we need to REPLACE enough committed members in the Senate and boot the 44th President, his Cabinet (which he apparently doesn't need or respect), and his 36 or so Czars out of office this November 2012.

This information on the number of time Congress has voted to repeal the ObamaCar law excerpted and edited from Hot Air -

The No. 33, and the surprisingly bipartisan art of repeal
posted at 5:26 pm on July 11, 2012 by Mary Katharine Ham

Today marks the 33rd vote the Republican-led Congress has taken to repeal all or part of ObamaCare. Many media outlets are using the stat du jour as sort of de facto proof of repeal’s futility. Look at these silly, extremist Republicans, tilting at government-subsidized windmills 33 times!

The fact is this is only the second vote on total repeal, the first one coming in January of 2011 after Americans elected a wave of 63 new Republicans to, you know, repeal ObamaCare. Both votes for full repeal, in 2011 and 2012, were more bipartisan than the vote to pass ObamaCare, with three and five Democrats crossing over to the Republican side, respectively.
----
The figure 33, of course, includes all sorts of bills that were only tangentially about ObamaCare repeal, or tweaked small parts of the bill, often with Democratic endorsement and votes. It includes several bills passed with hard-fought compromise later signed by Obama, like the debt-ceiling deal, and other bills that accomplished Obama’s legislative goals, such as the payroll tax cut extension bill.

So, are the House’s machinations futile and extreme?

There’s already been bipartisan cooperation in repealing large parts of the health care law in the House— the 1099 reporting requirement and the CLASS Act.

The very first part of ObamaCare to get the knife was the 1099 reporting requirement. That extremist bit of legislation passed the Senate 87-12 and the House, 314-112, and landed on the President’s desk for signing on April 14. The 1099 reporting requirement was one of the funding fictions ObamaCare supporters used to make it look as if the President’s plan would fulfill his promise not to “add a dime to the deficit.” Post-passage it was almost universally recognized as unworkable. It would have required businesses to fill out an IRS form (1099) for every $600 of staples and printer paper they bought at Target within a calendar year. It closed a loophole, and that loophole was shopping.

When it was repealed, Obama called it “a big win for small business.”

“Small business owners are the engine of our economy and because Democrats and Republicans worked together, we can ensure they spend their time and resources creating jobs and growing their business, not filling out more paperwork,” said the noted extremist.

The CLASS Act accounted for half of the Affordable Care Act’s [ObamaCare] claims of deficit reduction, but in February of 2012, it too was repealed by the House, with more than 28 Democrats crossing over to help. Obama’s deficit commission recommended its repeal and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admitted the program could not work.
----
The CLASS Act is still on the books, threatening to fall apart the moment someone tries to implement it. Democrats aren’t anxious to kill off what Sen. John Thune called a “zombie” program for fear of losing the funding fiction it supports and ceding momentum to repeal efforts.

The 1099 repeal was the culmination of an eight-month-long fight.

Nancy Pelosi once said we needed to pass the health care bill to see what was in it. Once we found out, it turned out repealing large parts of it would be a “big win for small businesses,” and save us from giant entitlements without a “viable path” forward. Republicans will and should keep trying to remove these boondoggles, and sometimes it’s gonna take quite a few tries. It always does with zombies.
[Reference Here]

Keep the current House of Representatives who are a proven force for REPEAL, replace the Senate Democrats that are up for re-election with committed conservatives who will work for a smaller Government and the REPEAL of the ObamaCare law, and REPLACE Barack Obama and the rest of his executive branch with Mitt Romney come November 2012.

Related: 
Technorati/Politisite West Coast editor Edmund Jenks, discussed this article and the ObamaCare Repeal Vote in the House of Representatives on Red Eye Radio at 1:06 a.m. East / 10:06 p.m. West 7/11/2012. To join the conversation every night - Call 1-866-90-REDEYE. Listen Live To Episode HERE   Website: http://www.redeyeradioshow.com/


** Article first published as ObamaCare Repeal Vote Not Showcase Or Futile on Technorati **

Senate Race For Republican Control Handicap - What To Watch For

Based on data from the Intrade prediction market. 10-30-2010

2010 Senate Race For Republican Control Handicap - What To Watch For

A Republican Party politico in the thick of watching the races for the Senate on November 2, 2010, explained the simplest way to do the math, with 9 pickups meaning a 50-50 Senate and 10 giving Republicans control.

The Senate seats that seem to be Republican Party locks are Indiana, Arkansas and North Dakota. All-but-sure things, in this Republican's view, are Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Illinois. THAT'S SIX. Then start adding states where margins are razor thin.

His order is: Nevada would be 7; Colorado would be 8; West Virginia would be 9; Washington would be 10; California would be 11.

Needless to say, a run of the table would become not just an undeniable and historic change of power in Washington D.C. but a restraining order on the 16% growth of spending in Government budgets applied over these last 19 months at a time the economy grew only 1.2%.

So ... get out there on November 2, 2010 and not just vote for a Republican Party candidate, issue a restraining order!

The Obama twist in his renewed push to pass Obamacare

Fable - Scorpion, River and Frog - Parody here shown with the USA as a frog, the Scorpion as Iran and the issue needing assistance as Iraq. Image Credit: photobucket.com

The Obama twist in his renewed push to pass Obamacare

You know the fable of the scorpion or snake wanting to cross to the other side of a river ... and after convincing a good-hearted yet suspicious frog to give it a ride on his back, the scorpion/snake gets half-way across the river, stings or bites the frog (as the case may be) ending its life and putting itself in peril as well.

Before succumbing to the sting or bite, the frog asks the scorpion/snake, "You have killed me and p0ssibly yourself as well. Why have you done this?

Response - "Because ... this is my nature."

President Barack Obama is a scorpion or snake asking the froggish House of Representatives (who represent the American people) to pass the Senate version of its 60 vote passed healthcare bill without modification.

The way this President and the Democrat political party plans on getting this final and verifying vote is to convince the members of the House of Representatives that if they pass this unchanged and unmodified bill, it will go back to the Senate for a "Reconciliation" vote that will fix the bill so that most damaging parts of this legislation will be amended ... then voted on and passed by the Senate with a simple majority vote.

The problem with this strategy is that if the current Senate version of this legislation gets passed on promises that it will get fixed in the Senate ... instead can go directly to the office of the President and be signed into law by Barack Obama.

The only way a true "Reconciliation" process can happen is if the Senate sends a BI-PARTISAN group of Senators (Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell needs to approve and appoint Republican political party Senate members to participate) to meet with members of the House of Representatives in order to fashion an agreeable, modified version of their bill for the House to vote on so this bill can be passed through the House, sent to the Senate, who then can pass this version with a simple majority ... then signed into law by the President.

What needs to be fixed before members of the House of Representatives would be able to come to an agreement on the Senate version of its healthcare bill follows here:

This excerpted and edited from the Daily Caller -

Obama doubling down on health care reform; time to call his bluff
By Rep. Joe Barton 03/08/10 at 12:01 AM

Democrats are currently cutting deals behind closed doors in the Capitol. Their plan is to abuse the legislative process by skipping regular order to pass this monstrosity by turning to a parliamentary trick called reconciliation. It has been used by both parties in the past, but never on anything as important or far reaching as health care.

To justify the move, the president and his Democratic cronies have flooded the media with half-truths and exaggerations, each designed at convincing people this isn’t a government take over of the health care system. But let’s look at the facts:

It will mandate private citizens purchase health care, whether they need it or want it.

It will cause millions of employers to cancel the health insurance they currently offer employees and force tens of millions of Americans into a government-run exchange.

It will create a health care czar to impose price controls on private health insurance that will lead to shortages and force even more people into government-run care.

I don’t doubt the president’s sincerity about the need to change health care in America, but despite his claims of compromise he has just paid lip service to Republican ideas.

There is a more effective and more affordable way to reform health care.

Instead of government intervention, we need to look to the marketplace—free choice, not mandates.
Reference Here>>

Watch for the sting or bite from this President aided by the Democrat political party leadership by having the House of Representatives pass the 60 vote Senate version of Obamacare INTACT ... on the promise of having it fixed in the Senate ... but it will go directly to the President's desk for Barack Obama to sign.

Write, call and fax your Congressman and have him or her to refuse to take a vote on any heathcare legislation and Kill The Bill!

The Truth Behind Oil Windfall Profits Tax Vote Failure

The world has a supply of oil, but will the United States ever be allowed to grow beyond being the third largest producer of oil in the world? Image Credit: Daniel Taghioff - Writing on the Wall

The Truth Behind Oil Windfall Profits Tax Vote Failure

Yesterday, all day, the news services were broadcasting and printing the following headline:

Republicans block Democrats' attempt to

impose windfall profits tax on oil companies

In several respects, this is not a clear picture of what really happened.

Sure, the Republican members of the Senate began debate on the Democrat proposal to impose a 25% tax upon the subjective “UNREASONABLE” profits of the five largest United States based oil companies – and the Democrats could not raise enough votes to stop the debate.

The truth behind the failure begins with the Democrats who hold a voting majority if all of the Senators showed up to vote, had seven additional Republican Senators willing to vote to stop debate.

One prominent Democrat that was not in attendance to vote with the majority was Barack Obama.

Senator Obama, the presumptive Democrat Party nominee for President issued a statement after all action on the bill was ended and one wonders, WHY? If one does not show up to participate and vote, do they really have anything constructive and informed by the process of failure to communicate?

Blah, Blah, Blah!

The Senate has 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, and one Independent that votes Democrat, giving the Democrats the leadership of the Senate. If ALL Democrats had showed up to vote and all voting Democrats and 1 Independent voted for the bill, added to the 7 Republicans that crossed party lines and against the wishes of the Republican leadership … the vote would have been 57 Yes and (who cares) No … still not the 60 votes needed for the bill to pass – REGARDLESS.

This excerpted and edited from Associated Press -

Republicans block Democrats' attempt to impose windfall profits tax on oil companies
The Associated Press - Published: June 11, 2008

Republicans, however, have said the bill would do nothing to ease soaring gasoline prices in the United States.

The Democrats failed, 51-43, to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster — a procedural tactic to delay debate on a bill — and bring the energy package up for consideration.

The defeat affords Democrats another opportunity, going into the November congressional and presidential elections, to try to cast Republicans as siding with the oil companies at a time of record gasoline prices.
----
But Republican leaders said the Democrats' plan would do harm rather than good — and they kept the legislation from being brought up for debate and amendments.
----
At the Capitol, Democratic leaders needed 60 votes and they got only 51 senators' support, including seven Republicans who bucked their party leaders.
----
Republican opponents argued that little was to be gained by imposing new taxes on the five U.S. oil giants: Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp., Shell Oil Co., BP America Inc. and Conoco-Philips Co.

While these companies may be huge, they do not set world oil prices and raising their taxes would discourage domestic oil production, the Republicans said of the Democrats' plan.

"In the middle of what some are calling the biggest energy shock in a generation ... they proposed as a solution, of all things, a windfall profits tax," Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky chided the Democrats. He called their proposal "a gimmick" that would not lower gasoline prices and only hold back domestic oil production.
----
Neither Republican presidential candidate John McCain nor his Democratic rival, Barack Obama, were in Washington to cast votes on the energy issue on Tuesday.

Obama, in a statement, said Republicans had "turned a blind eye to the plight of America's working families" by refusing to take up the energy legislation. Obama has supported additional taxes on the oil companies [and did not attend the debate]. McCain is opposed to such taxes and has proposed across-the-aboard tax reductions for industry as a way to help the economy [and did not attend the debate].

Election-year politics hung over the debate. Democrats know their energy package has no chance of becoming law. Even it were to overcome a Senate Republican filibuster — a longshot at best — and the House acted, President George W. Bush has made clear he would veto it.
----
In addition to the proposed windfall profits tax, the Democrats' bill also would have rescinded tax breaks that are expected to save the oil companies $17 billion over the next 10 years. The money would have been used to provide tax incentives for producers of wind, solar and other alternative energy sources as well as for energy conservation.
----
After Tuesday's defeat, Democrats did not rule out pushing the issue again.

"This was politics at its worst," complained Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill. "This was a refusal to debate the biggest problem confronting the American people. ... That takes nerve."
Reference Here>>

The "real politics at its worst" (as stated by Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill) on this subject is the irrational support for the NO NUKES for power stance the environmentalists hold and the Democrats (and leftists) back without debate.

Let us, here at MAXINE, not mention the refusal to allow oil field exploration, drilling, extraction, transportation, refinement, and sale of any NEW OIL here in the United States ... for the last four decades.

If only we could restrict the world's oil supply and reproduce long lines at the gas pumps, then we could all experience what Barack Obama and the Democrat Party would bring to the country if elected ... Carter's Second Term.

Harry Reid Takes Credit For EBAY Auction Idea

Senate Leader Harry Reid as he delivers a speech that gives himself a connection and credit for the success of the EBAY auction of the SMEAR letter sent to the president of Rush Limbaugh’s EIB syndication partner, Clear Channel. Image Credit: CSPAN via Rush Limbaugh website

Harry Reid Takes Credit For EBAY Auction Idea

In a speech broadcast on CSPAN from the Senate floor at 12:00pm EST, Harry Reid takes credit for EBAY auction idea.

Harry Reid makes this all about HIMSELF!

Signatures Of Shame - Democrat Party Presidential Nominee Candidate Signatures - Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Senator Barack Hussein Obama, and Senator Christopher John Dodd - From The Original Harry Reid/Rush Limbaugh Smear Letter - Image Credit: The United States Senate via EBAY

He takes credit for the letter ... and its monetary value ... when this (the letter's value) is more about the letter and the act it represents, not who wrote, or signed it.

Transcript Here (notice the term "WE", and tries to ride the coat-tails of the Rush Limbaugh EBAY effort):

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT - Video Here>>

RUSH: Here's the transcript of what Dingy Harry said and we're looking for it, we'll have the audio, but this is what Dingy Harry said on the floor of the Senate at noon Eastern time today:

HARRY REID: "Madam President, earlier this month I came to the floor to discuss some comments made by Rush Limbaugh. Following my remarks, more than 40 of my Senate colleagues and I cosigned a letter to the chairman of Clear Channel, Mark May, telling him we wanted him to confer with Limbaugh regarding the statements he made." Is that not audacious? The United States Senate getting hold of the CEO of a private corporation to confer with me over words that I had uttered. "I've since spoken to Mark May about this. Mark May in fact called me regarding this letter. This week, Rush Limbaugh put the original copy of that letter up for auction on eBay. Mr. President, we didn't have time, or we could have gotten every Senator to sign that letter."

RUSH: What is that? Yeah, if we only had time, we could have gotten everybody to sign. How come not one Republican signed it? They had a couple of days to do this. I tell you, that's an amazing statement. Had we had more time, well, was it not worth taking the time, if this was such an important issue? If you would have taken the time, Senator Reid, wouldn't a hundred signatures really have had an impact on Mark Mays, the CEO of Clear Channel, more than 41 and totally partisan signatures since it was all Democrats.

HARRY REID: "He put the letter up for auction on eBay," [continued Mr. Reid] "and I think very, very constructively, let the proceeds of that to go to the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation. That provides scholarship assistance to Marines and federal law enforcement personnel whose parents fall in the line of duty. What could be a more worthwhile cause?" Rehabilitating Senator Reid is a worthwhile cause, which is I think what this is. "I think it's really good that this money on eBay is going to be raised for this purpose. When I spoke to Mark May, he and I thought this probably wouldn't make much..."

RUSH: So he's been involved in it now, huh? (laughing) He's now wormed his way into this! He's not matching. I don't think he's going to match, and he hasn't apologized for this, by the way.

HARRY REID: "When I spoke to Mark May, he and I thought this probably wouldn't make much money, a letter, written by Democrat Senators, complaining about something. This morning, the bid is more than two million for this. We've watched it during the week. It keeps going up and up and up. There's only a little bit of time left on it, but it certainly is going to be more than two million. Never did we think that this letter would bring money of this nature," said Senator Reid. "And for the cause, Madam President, it's extremely good. Now everybody knows that Rush Limbaugh and I don't agree on everything in life. Maybe that's kind of an understatement. But without qualification, Mark May, the owner of the network that has Rush Limbaugh, their auction is going to be something that raises money for a worthwhile cause. I don't know what we could do more important than helping to ensure that children of our fallen soldiers and police officers who have fallen in the line of duty have the opportunity for their children to have a good education."

RUSH: Think of this. He's using the word "we". He has inserted himself into this, ladies and gentlemen! It's going so well, it's something nobody by his own admission ever imagined, they want in on it! We've got the audio now. Let's just listen to it rather than me read it.

HARRY REID: Earlier this month, I came to the floor discussing comments made by Rush Limbaugh. Following my remarks, more than 40 of my Senate colleagues and I cosigned a letter to the chairman of Clear Channel, Mark May, telling him that we wanted him to -- to confer with Rush Limbaugh regarding the statements he made. I've since spoken to Mark May about this. Mark May in fact called me regarding this letter.

RUSH: It's Mays.

HARRY REID: This week, Rush Limbaugh put the original copy of that letter up for auction on eBay. Mr. President, we didn't have time or we could have gotten every Democratic Senator to sign that letter. But he put the letter up for auction on eBay. And I think very, very constructively, let the proceeds of that to go to the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation. What is the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation? It provides scholarship assistance to children of Marines and federal law enforcement personnel whose parent dies in the line of duty, as well as health care assistance for disabled children of fallen troops. What could be a more worthwhile cause? And I think it's really good that this money on eBay is going to be raised for this purpose. When I spoke to Mark May --

RUSH: Mays.

HARRY REID: -- I think that he and I thought this would probably not raise much money, a letter by Democratic Senators complaining about something. This morning, the bid is more than two million on this. We've watched it during the week. It keeps going up and up and up, and there's only a little bit of time left on it. But it's certainly going to be more than two million. Never did we think that this letter would bring money of this nature --

RUSH: Stop the tape here, stop the tape. Do you see what's happening here? This is a clever move, rather transparent, to totally take the credit for this. Had he not sent the letter -- "we" didn't think it would ever generate this kind of money, "we" think it's great to raise this kind of, "we" think this -- he's hoping that this is the angle the Drive-Bys will cover. Harry Reid is taking credit for writing the letter that gets this money raised for the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation. Resume tape.

HARRY REID: -- the cause, Madam President, extremely good. Now, everyone knows that Rush Limbaugh and I don't agree on everything in life, and maybe that's kind of an understatement. But without qualification, Mark May, the owner of the network that has Rush Limbaugh, and Rush Limbaugh should know that this letter that they're auctioning is going to be something that raises money for a really worthwhile cause. I don't know what we could do more important than helping make sure that children of our fallen soldiers and police officers who have fallen in the line of duty have the opportunity for their children to have a good education. Think about this. More than $2 million, this is going to really help. And that's, again, an understatement. There's only a little bit of time left.

RUSH: Wait 'til you hear what's coming.

HARRY REID: -- so I would ask those that are wanting to do more, that they can go to the Harry Reid, search -- actually go on say "Harry Reid letter," this will come up on eBay. I encourage anyone interested in this with the means to do so to consider bidding on this letter and contributing to this worthwhile cause.

RUSH: Hang on here.

HARRY REID: I strongly believe that when we can put our differences aside, even Harry Reid and Rush Limbaugh, we should do that and try to accomplish good things for the American people.

RUSH: Okay. Put our differences aside? Has he apologized? He is trying to horn in and act like he's part of this whole thing, folks. This is unbelievable! And now he's out there soliciting contributions on eBay, and believe me, this is what he hopes, of all of the past two weeks, that the Drive-Bys pick up on. Well, I wasn't going to do this. I wasn't going to go back in time. But let's go back, Monday, October 1st, 17 days ago, on the very same Senate floor, Harry Reid said this.

HARRY REID: Last week, Rush Limbaugh went way over the line, way over the line. While I respect his right to say anything he likes, his unpatriotic comments I cannot ignore. During his show last Wednesday, Limbaugh was engaged in one of his typical rants. This one was unremarkable and indistinguishable from his usual drivel, which has been steadily losing listeners for years, until he crossed that line by calling our men and women in uniform who oppose the war in Iraq, and I quote, phony soldiers. This comment was so beyond the pale of decency that we can't leave it alone. And yet he followed it up with denials and an attack on Congressman Jack Murtha, who was a 37-year active member of the Marine Corps, a combat veteran.

RUSH: I wasn't going to go back and relive this because it's ancient history, and we've been moving forward. Senator Reid, you did not mention that I am matching whatever the final total is. That is "we." You were offered an invitation to come on this program and say to my face what we just replayed you saying, that I am unpatriotic, and all of the other smears and lies that you believed from Media Matters for America or whether you knew were smears and lies and just went ahead with it anyway. So now all of a sudden this is "we"? You and I have buried the hatchet? You haven't even apologized for this yet and now he wants credit for helping raise this money, as though he's been involved in it all along. It's Orwellian. It's surreal. It's alternate universe. It continues. Senator Reid, I asked you, I suggested that you and Senators in the Senate who could afford this match it. I haven't heard whether you want to match the final total. I pledged to do so from the get-go. By the way, one more time, it's Mays. It's Mark Mays. There's an S on the end of his name.

HARRY REID: Rush Limbaugh took it upon himself to attack the courage and character of those fighting and dying for him and for all of us. Rush Limbaugh got himself a deferment from serving when he was a young man. He never served in uniform. He never saw in person the extreme difficulty of maintaining peace in a foreign country engaged in a civil war. He never saw a person in combat. Yet he thinks that his opinion on the war is worth more than those who have been on the front lines. And what's worse, Limbaugh's show is broadcast on Armed Forces Radio, which means that thousands of troops overseas and veterans here at home were forced to hear this attack on their patriotism. Rush Limbaugh owes the men and women of our armed forces an apology.

RUSH: Right. And he wants to pretend now that he's all supportive of this and very happy about it, and that this is "we" and we've buried the hatchet. I still haven't been apologized to for any of this.

RUSH: This attempt by Harry Reid to take to the floor of the Senate at 12 noon Eastern Time today to personalize this and make it about himself, you just know the mainstream media, the Drive-Bys, will get on this story now and Reid will end up being very positively portrayed. He has quotes about how "we" never thought that the letter would generate this kind of money. "We" never thought...? "Mark May and I..." It's Mays! "Mark May and I talked about this, and Mark May and I..." Senator Reid, let me be clear about this one more time -- actually, as many times as it takes. It wasn't your letter that raised this money. It was your abuse of power that is responsible for raising this money. No other letter you have written would be... People wouldn't pay a dime for it, Senator! This one represents an abuse of power: a federal government official, a US senator, getting hold -- after besmirching me and smearing me by name personally from the Senate floor, gets hold -- of the CEO of my syndication partner and asks him to "confer" with me about something Senator Reid thought was said that was improper? Words? First Amendment? Free speech? That, sir, is an abuse of power. That is why your letter is historic, not because you signed it, not because 40 other people signed it, not because you wrote it. It is because of what that letter represents: a full-fledged, undeniable, 100% abuse of power, and that's how this letter will be remembered by historians forever.

RUSH: Translation for Harry Reid's speech on the Senate floor today: "You win, Rush."

END TRANSCRIPT

Rush Limbaugh, after reading the transcript and hearing the remarks (in context), called the statement read on the Senate floor and broadcast on CSPAN "Brazen", "Insidious", and "Unbelieveable".

After listening to the remarks replayed on the radio show (11:20am PST), we, at MAXINE, would have to agree with Rush. Oh ... and there was not a hint of an apology (or Rush's matching contribution of $2,100,100) for what had been written in the SMEAR letter.

The Senate "IMUS-ing" (an abuse-of-power out-of-context smear hammered on by the media to create a firing) of Rush Limbaugh did not work.

Rush - 1

Senate (Harry Reid and 40 Senate Democrats) - 0

This abuse of power action was as successful as this current session of Congress (while spending time on stuff like this and deriding our troops, they have not been able to pass a thing).

Media Matters Batters Media

A quote from a fund-raising email by David Brock, President of Media Matters - "Media Matters has already exposed more than 6,000 instances of conservative misinformation in just two years -- and not just from right-wing news outlets such as Fox News Channel, but from sources like CNN, The Washington Post, and The New York Times." (The site, called Media Matters, was devised as part of a larger media apparatus being built by liberals to combat what they say is the overwhelming influence of conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly) Image & Caption Credit: NewsBusters

Media Matters (targeted attacks) Batters Media

In a stepped up effort to control the freedom of speech and censor talk radio, Media Matters targets leading radio hosts for a smear campaign of words.

What is really sad about this effort is that the current power structure in Washington are willing soldiers in this effort to take out-of-context words (not actions or fully articulated ideas) and characterize them as a form of “Hate Speech”

Many people think that this effort is designed to be a political Left vs Right thing but the real effort is to try to control the last bastion of free media and education that remains here in these United States.

This effort by Media Matters is currently focused on “Talk Radio” but it will be only a matter of time that this ugly smear campaign will be targeting the platform it broadcasts from – the internet.

The leadership in both the House of Representatives and the Senate are already using these out-of-context attacks and reading them without further investigation on the Congress and Senate floor … what is going to stop them from labeling an effort to shut down the internet as an agenda to “Protect Our Children”?

We, at MAXINE, are becoming very suspicious of the joining-of-forces between a George Soros funded, reputation-smearing website and the lawmaking leadership in Congress.

Eventually in years to come, when these elite world governors have the technology, they will only need a workforce large enough to sustain them and their families. Everyone else will be superfluous to requirements, and if you have no useful employment for the Elite, you will starve also. The Alpha Elite, or whatever they call themselves, will be like you and me who enjoy the beach freely when no-one else is there, but feel that their freedom is being restricted if they have to share it with anyone else. For them, who have aspirations of god like proportions, the beach is the world. Anyone who is not there to serve their benefit, will have no rights to exist anywhere. Caption & Image Credit: lockstockandbarrel.org

The reason this targeting activity is happening at this time and against Talk Radio is that the leadership in Congress already control Network Television, daily major market Newspapers, our University and education systems, and most other broadcast outlets through the issuance of licenses and intimidation. Talk Radio is the last bastion of free speech … callers call in and the governmental leadership can not stop it. This effort is advertiser supported and with great success. The minute someone tries to control the outcome of the freedom of speech (see Air America) the effort fails miserably.

Heads Up! Everybody – this is only the beginning of a fascist-socialist media control effort from the funding and influence of billionaire George Soros (Chairman of Soros Fund Management, LLC and founder of The Open Society Institute).

With the current leadership in Congress – Get Use To It!

National Sovereignty … It’s A Good Thing

“Sanctu-Harry” Reid (Sanctuary/Harry), in a final attempt to stitch together a few more votes to gain passage of the cloture vote, took to the Senate floor and waxed about a phone call he had receive from “Tommy”. Image Credit: Uncorrolated.com - January 11, 2007

National Sovereignty … It’s A Good Thing

The Senate finally listens to the very strong opinion of the American people and shot down the revived effort to legalize the status of 12 to 20 million Human Beings. These Human Beings choose to continue to break our laws to be accepted and live here in the United States in a properly identified manner.

“Sanctu-Harry” Reid (Sanctuary/Harry), in a final attempt to stitch together a few more votes to gain passage of the cloture vote, took to the Senate floor and waxed about a phone call he had receive from “Tommy”.

While standing and addressing the whole of the Senate, Harry Reid stated that he was withholding the last name of Tommy for fear of the government would look him up and possibly deport him. Tommy had called the leader of the Senate to urge him on to pass the immigration reform bill so that he or his friend would not have to live in fear any more.

This is the leader of the Senate … sworn to uphold the laws of our land and he admittedly pursued a process of sanctuary for Tommy by withholding his last name. With leadership like this, no wonder we can not get funding for the border fence that had been approved last year.

Recognition of the 53 members of the Senate that believe National Sovereignty is a good thing should take place. A particular mention should be made for Senator Brownback of Kansas, who changed his vote from Yea! To Nay! during the course of the roll call vote process.

Voting "no" were 15 Democrats, 37 Republicans and 1 independent.

Democrats No

Baucus, Mont.; Bayh, Ind.; Bingaman, N.M.; Brown, Ohio; Byrd, W.Va.; Dorgan, N.D.; Harkin, Iowa; Landrieu, La.; McCaskill, Mo.; Nelson, Neb.; Pryor, Ark.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Stabenow, Mich.; Tester, Mont.; Webb, Va.

Republicans No

Alexander, Tenn.; Allard, Colo.; Barrasso, Wy.; Bond, Mo.; Brownback, Kan.; Bunning, Ky.; Burr, N.C.; Chambliss, Ga.; Coburn, Okla.; Cochran, Miss.; Coleman, Minn.; Collins, Maine; Corker, Tenn.; Cornyn, Texas; Crapo, Idaho; DeMint, S.C.; Dole, N.C.; Domenici, N.M.; Ensign, Nev.; Enzi, Wyo.; Grassley, Iowa; Hatch, Utah; Hutchison, Texas; Inhofe, Okla.; Isakson, Ga.; McConnell, Ky.; Murkowski, Alaska; Roberts, Kan.; Sessions, Ala.; Shelby, Ala.; Smith, Ore.; Stevens, Alaska; Sununu, N.H.; Thune, S.D.; Vitter, La.; Voinovich, Ohio; Warner, Va.

Others No

Sanders, Vt.

In the same regard, one should shun the following Senators for NOT protecting the sovereignty of the country they represent. Most surprising of these names voting to extend amnesty through the “Z-Visa” is the pro war-on-terror Senator Joseph Lieberman, Connecticut.

Voting "yes" were 33 Democrats, 12 Republicans and 1 independent.

Democrats Yes

Akaka, Hawaii; Biden, Del.; Boxer, Calif.; Cantwell, Wash.; Cardin, Md.; Carper, Del.; Casey, Pa.; Clinton, N.Y.; Conrad, N.D.; Dodd, Conn.; Durbin, Ill.; Feingold, Wis.; Feinstein, Calif.; Inouye, Hawaii; Kennedy, Mass.; Kerry, Mass.; Klobuchar, Minn.; Kohl, Wis.; Lautenberg, N.J.; Leahy, Vt.; Levin, Mich.; Lincoln, Ark.; Menendez, N.J.; Mikulski, Md.; Murray, Wash.; Nelson, Fla.; Obama, Ill.; Reed, R.I.; “Sanctu-Harry” Reid, Nev.; Salazar, Colo.; Schumer, N.Y.; Whitehouse, R.I.; Wyden, Ore.

Republicans Yes

Bennett, Utah; Craig, Idaho; Graham, S.C.; Gregg, N.H.; Hagel, Neb.; Kyl, Ariz.; Lott, Miss.; Lugar, Ind.; Martinez, Fla.; McCain, Ariz.; Snowe, Maine; Specter, Pa.

Others Yes

Lieberman, Conn.

The 46-53 roll call vote by which the Senate voted to block final action on a bill that would have legalize millions of unlawful immigrants took place June 28, 2007.

Let the celebration of the sovereignty and power of the American people begin.

Also, let the vigorous enforcement of or borders and immigration laws begin as well.
(ht: Associated Press, Laura Ingraham)

Of Amnesty Burgers And Beltway Fools

Image Credit: Michelle Malkin

Of Amnesty Burgers And Beltway Fools

The people we elect to run our Government and protect us ... Do Not Care!

This from Michelle Malkin (with edits from MAXINE)-

The J. Wellington Wimpy immigration plan:
Amnesty now, enforcement later
By Michelle Malkin - May 18, 2007 - 01:10 PM

It was true in 1986. It's as true as ever in 2007. Wimpy will get his amnesty burgers and the Beltway fools who keep deluding themselves about the false promise of immigration enforcement will be left empty-handed. Again.

Amnesty is the hamburger. Enforcement is the payment that will never come. I've reported this reality over and over and over and over and over again. All the leaked memos and graphs and analysis in the world, however, cannot sum up the deportation/enforcement/border security sham--and the mess at DHS--more clearly than the reality expressed by an illegal alien quoted by the Associated Press today:

"If I get deported and need to cross the border again, that's not a problem," he said.

Republicans in Washington who are embracing the Bush-Kennedy amnesty will tell you the package is tough on enforcement because the millions of illegal aliens who are here now will be deported later if they fail to meet the requirements of their so-called "Z visas."

Here is how the clueless Republican National Committee is selling it:

No Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants: Illegal immigrants who come out of the shadows will be given probationary status. Once the border security and enforcement benchmarks are met, they must pass a background check, remain employed, maintain a clean criminal record, pay a $1,000 fine, and receive a counterfeit-proof biometric card to apply for a work visa or "Z visa." Some years later, these Z visa holders will be eligible to apply for a green card, but only after paying an additional $4,000 fine; completing accelerated English requirements; getting in line while the current backlog clears; returning to their home country to file their green card application; and demonstrating merit under the merit-based system.

Those who refuse to return home, comply with the visa provisions, or who remain here illegally and don't apply, supposedly would be deported ... Later.

Department of Homeland Security chief and Ted Kennedy cheerleader Michael Chertoff regurgitated the same talking points at a press conference earlier today. Open-borders Republicans in the Senate are committing them to memory pronto.

Image Credit: Michelle Malkin

Does this empty promise of the amnesty/deportation trade-off sound familiar?

Why, yes, yes it does.

Let me boil it down to fundamentals: Bush-Kennedy amnesty is the J. Wellington Wimpy plan:

"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."
Reference Here>>

YES! More Troops For Iraq

An F/A-18 Hornet approaches for landing on the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier after flight operations in this Thursday, March 20, 2003 file photo. The first Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired early Thursday against Iraqi targets Image Credit: AP Photo/FILE/Richard Vogel

YES! More Troops For Iraq

It is always confusing for a politically charged, micro-management focused, uninformed populous to rile against what a war power professional may recognize as the right thing to do at a time of conflict ... but, YES, more troops for Iraq.

General Petreaus was approved by unanimous vote by the Senate because it was the right thing to do - and now HE wants more troops because it IS the right thing to do.

The one thing that we have learned as it relates to task competency is that one leaves the decision making of each task to the trained professionals.

MAXINE has one question - When you have a pain in your jaw coming from a cracked tooth, which do you want to work on it ... Senator Kennedy, Senator Clinton ... Any Senator, or a trained and proven dentist with a going practice?

Give the General his request and let him run the war, thank you!

Excerpts from the Boston Globe -

General seeks another brigade in Iraq
By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff March 16, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The top US commander in Iraq has requested another Army brigade, in addition to five already on the way, as part of the controversial "surge" of American troops designed to clamp down on sectarian violence and insurgent groups, senior Pentagon officials said yesterday.

The appeal -- not yet made public -- by General David Petraeus for a combat aviation unit would involve between 2,500 and 3,000 more soldiers and dozens of transport helicopters and powerful gunships, said the Pentagon sources. That would bring the planned expansion of US forces to close to 30,000 troops.

News of the additional deployment comes about a week after President Bush announced that about 4,700 support troops will join the initial 21,500 he ordered in January. They are in addition to the estimated 130,000 troops already in Iraq.

"This is the next shoe to drop," said one senior Pentagon official closely involved in the war planning, who requested anonymity because of prohibitions against publicly discussing internal deliberations. "But you cannot put five combat brigades in there and not have more aviation guys, military police, and intelligence units."
----
"There is a problem in the way the administration reported the surge numbers to begin with," said Frederick W. Kagan , a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "When they initially reported the numbers they only reported the combat strength of the brigades, and they did not count support troops" and other personnel that the operation would need.

"Petraeus has now requested what many thought would be needed to begin with," Kagan said, "but it looks like another surge."

The plan for the aviation brigade is occurring as commanders express cautious optimism that US and Iraqi forces, working together, are quelling the violence in the city and building some much-needed good will among the population.
----
But news that Petraeus wants several thousand more troops is bound to further frustrate the Democratic majority in Congress, which is intent on pressuring President Bush to start bringing troops home within months.

For the second day yesterday, the Senate debated a resolution that would require President Bush to begin a phased withdrawal of US troops within 120 days.

The resolution failed to garner enough votes to pass, but Democratic leaders have pledged to use their power to force the White House's hand, including placing limitations on federal funds for the war.
----
Despite the congressional opposition, the number of US troops committed to Iraq has steadily grown since Bush decided to send the 21,500 troops, the equivalent of five Army brigades and two Marine Corps battalions.

The Congressional Budget Office predicted last month that the total "surge" could ultimately double in size and cost once all support troops are in place.
----
The new unit would bring to four the total number of aviation brigades in Iraq. The official said American commanders would have to reassess in a few months whether they want to keep the higher number; if so, they would have to identify another brigade to relieve one of them.

Military strategists consider the aviation unit an "enabler," meaning it will help the additional combat troops who are spearheading the new Baghdad security plan and operations to secure several cities in Anbar Province where Sunni insurgents and followers of Al Qaeda have gained a foothold.
----
" Any time you deploy more combat forces you need more support forces," said Michael O'Hanlon , a defense specialist at the Brookings Institution who compiles the Iraq Index. "You need some tactical mobility to get them out of trouble."
Read All>> (free subscription required)

More support forces to enable more troop forces, makes sense to MAXINE!