Happy New Years

This blog reserves the right to get plastered on New Year's Eve. You should too.

Just remember, drink responsibly.

House GOP Grants Itself More Spending Power

The fiscal conservatives who ran up the largest deficit in human history will soon grant themselves new spending rules for their next Permanent Majority. Surprisingly the right wing National Journal picks up the story:

A little-noticed detail in the new rules proposed by House GOP leaders would greatly increase the power of Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the incoming chairman of the House Budget Committee. As National Journal's Katy O'Donnell reports, the new rules say that, for fiscal 2011, the chairman will set spending limits without needing a vote.

Most progressive bloggers are seeing this rule change as a way to shut-down government. Or as a way to strip funding from President Obama's health care reform or stimulus spending.  Though I tend to agree with that assumption because Republicans would love nothing more than to strip funding away from a person they view as an enemy of the country.  I tend to also see it as a way for the GOP to increase spending without actually having to be held responsible for it.  No votes will take place on the spending limits therefore the public will never know.  Sure it's a way to hold the Congress hostage but it's also a way for Republicans to simply move funding from an initiative they hate to one they like.

Could you imagine the backlash if Nancy Pelosi gave herself the power to set spending limits without a vote? Right wing conspiracy theories would be abundant with stories about how she had given herself an unlimited credit card backed up by tax money.  When Republicans actually do give themselves such extraordinary power, the left wants to complain that they will restrict funding and not spend enough.  None of that makes any sense considering Republicans have never, ever, not one single time, ever cut spending.  Democrats portraying this as a spending chopping block have already lost the debate.

Source: Chadwick Research

Fox News Still Most Popular

On the surface, Fox being the most watched news program in America is scary. There's no doubt that in addition to being the most watched, Fox is also the most misleading. It's viewers are the most uninformed group in the country. So yes, on the surface, it's cringe worthy to know Fox is that popular.

But consider this. At any given time there are five times more people watching Spongebob Squarepants or Hannah Montana than Fox News. So being the most watched media channel in America is like winning a NCAA Division II basketball championship-- you're in 347th place.

Country Music Has Plenty of Democrats

Here's a take on country music singers that goes against the conventional stereotype: Very few of them are hard-lined right wingers. In fact quite a few of them are left of center, liberal, or just good ol' Democrats.  One of the most famous country music singers in the world, Johnny Cash, was a self-described liberal.  One of my favorite quotes from him is "let's just say I didn't vote for George Bush," from 2005.

I've been a fan of country music pretty much more whole life.  I know way more about country music than any other genre.  So I've always found it odd that more people don't realize country music is more than just right wing Republicans.  One of the biggest stars in country music today, Toby Keith, is a Democrat.  Tim McGraw and Faith Hill are huge Democrats.  Arguably one of the biggest names ever in country music, Garth Brooks, is also a Democrat.  Willie Nelson, yep a Democrat.  Todd Snider, Steve Earle (a personal favorite) and Kris Kristofferson are all Democrats.  Let us not forget, either, Merle Haggard, pure country music royalty, is a Democrat.

Speaking of Merle, he tells Rolling Stone the media gets very little right about President Obama and the lying is abundant.

It was also nice to meet Obama and find him very different from the media makeout. It's really almost criminal what they do with our President. There seems to be no shame or anything. They call him all kinds of names all day long, saying he's doing certain things that he's not. It's just a big old political game that I don't want to be part of. There are people spending their lives putting him down. I'm sure some of it's true and some of it's not. I was very surprised to find the man very humble and he had a nice handshake. His wife was very cordial to the guests and especially me. They made a special effort to make me feel welcome. It was not at all the way the media described him to be.

The whole interview is a good read and worth a few minutes.(H/T TPM)

The New GOP Looks a Lot Like the Old GOP

Here's how well Republicans learned from their past.

• Alabama Senator Dick Shelby keeps pumping half a billion dollars of tax payer money into his home district to fund a rocket NASA no longer wants. It just so happens, too, the maker of the rocket is Sen. Shelby's top campaign donor. Coincidence I'm sure.
• There will be 289 Republicans in the next Congress.  Less than 2% of them (5 actually) have chosen to forgo their government-run health plans.

• Tea bagger Governor-elect in Maine, who ran his campaign against what he called corrupt government and cronyism, hired his 22 year old daughter for an upper level staff position worth $41,000 a year.  She has no experience and her degree is not in government.  But he's a tea bagger favorite so this does not count has nepotism or an abuse of tax dollars.

• New rules for the upcoming Republican House session eliminate PayGo, the measure that forces new spending to be paid for.  It was used in the 90s and removed once George W. Bush took over.  When Democrats regained Congressional power in 2007 they reinstated PayGo.  But Republicans are now replacing it with CutGo, which makes it easier for them to pass legislation that increases the deficit such as they did in 2003 with their huge expansion to Medicare or in 2001 with their tax cuts.  Now remember, these are the small government, fiscal conservatives doing this.

• In claiming to stick with their campaign platforms of cutting spending and shrinking government, Republican leaders have pledged to cut trim a whopping $100 billion from the budget.  Yes, $100 billion of $3 trillion is chump change.  But they have pledged not to make cuts in defense spending and will only cut the money from non-security discretionary spending.  Well, that means Republicans plan to cut $100 billion from either education, health care, housing, urban development or any other social program they don't like that day.  Why didn't they run their campaigns by saying they were going to cut $100 billion from education??

• More GOP reps are hiring more and more lobbyists at alarming rates...faster than ever before to be exact.  Once again, an action that flies in the face of their campaign rhetoric.

Seems they learned their lessons well.

Even State Mandates Have to Follow the Constitution

To me the individual mandate is one small part of the health care reform package. Is it necessary? Not entirely, or at least not the way it's written currently. With that said, I still feel the mandate is Constitutional and will be upheld by the Supreme Court. You can read here and here for the various ways around the current mandate that I've written about.

All this goes without saying the individual mandate was a Republican proposal dating back to 1993 when they feared HillaryCare would put private insurance out of business.  So from 1993-March 2009 Republicans embraced what they considered the only viable Constitutional way to keep private insurance companies from vanishing.  All it took was for a Democratic Congress and a black president to legislate their idea for them to turn against it.  And against it is a vast understatement.

The question then becomes how do partially sane Republicans square their recent past with their new found conspiracy theory against the mandate?  Avik Roy of National Review Online demonstrates.

It is true, however, that when Mitt Romney installed the individual mandate in Massachusetts, he did so with the backing of the Heritage Foundation and others. Benen alleges that their change of heart is “about cheap politics.” One can never exclude cheapness from politics, but pro-mandate conservatives had plenty of legitimate reasons for changing their minds. One, addressed above, is the Constitutional difference between state-level mandates and federal ones. From a policy point of view, however, the more important factor was the experience of seeing the mandate in action in Massachusetts.

Except for the fact that none of that is true because the Constitution applies to the states just as it applies to the federal government. This, again, is another instance where Republicans are picking and choosing what parts of the Constitution applies to them.  States are no less-- or no more-- bound by the Constitution than the feds.  A state insurance mandate still has to pass the Constitutionality question.  Heck a city insurance mandate would have to pass the Constitutionality question just the same.

Let's put this into language a Republican might understand.  What if Massachusetts mandated you could no longer own firearms?  Obviously Republicans would call it unconstitutional and I would agree with them.  It's a state mandate yet it clearly violates the Constitution.  Or what if Texas mandated that consenting adults couldn't engage in certain forms of sexual activity.  Yep, that mandate too has to abide by the Constitution which is why the Supreme Court struck down Texas sex laws in 2003.

There is no "Constitutional difference between state-level mandates and federal ones."  States don't get an exemption from the Constitution to test out new laws. They have to follow the same basic guidelines setup in the Constitution.  That is why the individual mandate put in place by Republican Mitt Romney and done so with the backing of multitudes of Republicans is such a thorn in their side.  The mandate is and was their idea and it has never been ruled unconstitutional in Massachusetts. But now it just might be the only nagging point they can publicly make against President Obama's health care reform so they'll pretend that it wasn't their plan, or that if it was, it was done so because states have different Constitutional levels.  No they don't.  There's one level, we all play on it and no one is above it.

Quickies- Christmas Break Edition

Natalie Portman is engaged and knocked up.

Excellent primer on why the filibuster was not an intention of our Founding Fathers.

Jaz makes his case against the individual mandate by comparing it to the federal government forcing everyone to go on a cruise.  Hey, at least he thinks the rest of the law is okay.

Barack Obama is still the most popular politician in America.

Republicans look to replace earmarking with a new twist, lettermarking.  You know since they banned earmarks and all.

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

111th Keeps on Giving

Someone smarter than me might say that if the Democrats in charge of the 111th Congress had governed with their agenda before the lame duck session of 2010 they might have been able to hold onto their majority in the House or at least narrowed their losses.  It's a novel idea I know.

Since the beginning of December Democrats have enjoyed an up-tick in approval from the public.  A smart person might say it's because they are actually doing something people support.  Repealing DADT was very popular.  Ratifying START was as well.  And 56% approve of how the president has advanced the lame duck session.  Doing what you were elected to do can be popular if not an empowering phenomenon.

Knowing full well things turn on a dime, Democrats should at least take this Holiday Season to bask in a slight array of good accomplishments.  Just don't get too comfortable cause nothing is forever.  And January is right around the corner.

Festivus for the rest of us

Happy Festivus!

I Kinda Like This Whole Republican Obstructionism Stuff

You know I really like Republican obstructionism. Over the last two years Republicans have done nothing but cry like babies, filibuster, cock block, cry like babies, whine about make-believe conspiracy theories, and obstruct the government all because they aren't in power. And what has it wrought us??

• A stimulus package that delivered the country from the brink of economic disaster
• A Dow that is up 40% since Obama took office
• The largest tax cuts in history
• Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
• SCHIP
• Ted Kennedy Serve America Act
• Credit Card Reform
• PayGo
• Health Care Reform*
• Wall St. Reform
• DADT Repeal*
• A shrinking budget deficit
• And we are about to get START ratified and the DREAM Act passed within a couple days  THEY PASSED START!

So when I see Mitch McConnell say that next year is going to be even better for Republican Do-Nothingism, I'm all for it.  Actually I'm excited when he says he's going to make Democratic angst even greater next year. By golly, I hope he's not just teasing.

* denotes monumental pieces of legislation that if enacted alone would be huge accomplishes for any government and yet they are amongst a long list of epic accomplishments.

he's crying cause he cares

Guess That Whole Census Thing Wasn't a Socialist Ploy

Remember when Obama took office and the first Republican Conspiracy theory used to prove he was implementing a socialist takeover was that he was forcing the census upon us? I mean how dare he. Never mind the fact the Constitution makes the government perform a census every ten years, it's the fact that the Constitution doesn't specifically mention "by a Democratic president named Barack Hussein Obama" that makes it all illegal.

It was to the point that Republicans were telling people not to fill out the forms that way Obama wouldn't know where you lived when he came to put you in a concentration camp.  Yes it got that bad.

So how is it the census is actually helping Republicans in 2012?  Could it be possible the GOP was lying simply to bring down a very popular president?

*Update

Thankfully a very Super Patriotic American that Sean Hannity would be proud of pointed out that I used the word "feel" instead of "fill" in the post above. See this comment for my very honest mistake. And a huge thank you to the Great American that made it all possible.

Who Would You Trust?

I swear Dave Weigel is becoming a bottomless source of information.

Is this who you get your foreign policy advise from?

If you're Republican, you should be proud.

Full story here.  Senate Democrats finally make the GOP own it.

They Are Lying to You

It doesn't take any sort of scientific study to conclude people who watch Fox News are dumb. All you have to do is talk to one of your friends who is a routine consumer of Republican news and you can decipher for yourself that your friend is mentally incapable of talking current events or is being lied to by Fox.  It's one or the other or possibly both.

But that didn't stop the Program on International Policy Attitudes from proving what many of us already know, Fox News viewers love being lied to.

The study by PIPA discovered:

Those who watched Fox News almost daily were significantly more likely than those who never watched it to believe that:

* Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses.

* Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit.

* The economy is getting worse.

* Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring.

* The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts.

* Their own income taxes have gone up.

* The auto bailout only occurred under Obama.

* When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it.

* And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States.

Naturally Fox News cast aside anyone who questions their content as being NOT Very Serious Americans. A top senior vice president at Fox mentioned that the university where the study was conducted just also happens to be a party school.

The latest Princeton Review ranked the University of Maryland among the top schools for having 'Students Who Study The Least' and being the 'Best Party School' - given these fine academic distinctions, we'll regard the study with the same level of veracity it was 'researched' with."

As if the undergraduate body at UM has anything to do with the study. But according to Fox News it invalidates the entire thing.  For those who actually want their media station to tell the truth, News Hounds makes note that UM actually ranks among the best colleges in the Northeast and is number 19 on the list of party schools.  Number 19??  That's not a party school.

But the best proof of all that Fox News is a Very Serious news organization that wants its viewers to be well-informed on topics that are important to the world happened yesterday when Fox brought in world renowned international relations and foreign policy expert Jon Voight to dismantle President Obama's START treaty with Russia.  Yes, Jon Voight the actor.  You know the guy who has never spent a second of his life doing any sort of work in the realm of anything outside of Hollywood.  But he votes Republican and that's all that matters to Fox News in order to qualify someone as an expert in everything under the sun.

Complete Idiots

Dave Weigel reminds us that Republicans are serious about including a Constitutionality Statement into every piece of legislation in the upcoming session.

The Statement is supposed to show the public that the bills they pass are Constitutional unlike the bills Democrats passed.  This may be the most retarded thing I've ever seen.

I wonder what kind of Statement they would have put at the end of their completely unfunded expansion of Medicare in 2003?

Fiscal Conservatism at Work, GOP Style

After increasing his staff's payroll by 81% since 2001, incoming Majority Leader Eric Cantor now says he deserves credit for recognizing the out of control congressional salaries and being willing to do something about it.  Huh??

That's like Julian Assange saying he recognizes there is a governmental leaking problem and wants to fix it.  It's crazy.

Cantor and Republicans have been arguing for a year that salaries on Capitol Hill are too high.  Well, that's because they are the people raising them!!

- Tea bagger extraordinaire Michelle Bachmann's payroll has skyrocketed 16% in two years!!

- Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the Utah Republican set to chair the House subcommittee overseeing the federal work force, says Washington must "figure out how to do more with less." But the freshman lawmaker gave his own employees an average raise of about 9 percent this year.

- Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who has long criticized federal pay, has overseen an average jump of 8 percent per year in his office employee costs between 2006, his first full year in the Senate, and 2009.

It takes a very sick person to go out and yell and scream against something that you are the very cause of.

Illinois, the Land of Gay Republicans

This just dawned on me too. Illinois not only has a gay Republican U.S. senator but our next in line for the Treasurer's office is gay too and Republican. Interesting.

Mark Kirk Cut Deal to Repeal DADT

Mark Kirk is to the best of my knowledge the only gay member of the U.S. Senate. Everyone in Illinois has known he is gay for a long time. Kirk is also a member of the U.S. military. So why in the world he would have to cut a deal in order to vote in favor of something that would make his lifestyle a little freer is troubling.

It Was a Good Day

Finally.

Tea Baggers Where Art Thou?

Late last night, or early this morning, whichever you prefer, the House passed President Obama's plan to temporary extend tax cuts for everyone, and an extension of unemployment benefits for our jobless country.  The plan will add roughly an additional $1 trillion to the deficit.  There are no spending cuts tied to the plan, no offsets, no PayGo, no CutGo.  Only a completely unfunded tax cut extension that is the largest addition to the deficit since the first wave of tax cuts were passed in 2001 [if we don't include our Glorious War that is].

So where are the tea baggers?  Why are they not protesting this deal?  They claim to be fiscal conservatives that want to shrink the deficit, shrink government and reign in spending.  This piece of legislation does the opposite of all three.  Where are these nut slappers at is my question?

For one, the tax cut extension is a Republican plan.  That's why the tea baggers are so silent.  Two, they are mostly unemployed so they are glad they are getting their welfare checks back-- yes they are that delusional.  Three, they actually see this as a victory because the plan keeps taxes at current levels, which is all they care about while deficit reduction is a fantasy issue to them.

I Don't Mind Stealing Bread

Continuing from the post below concerning the idiotic inbred attempt by Republicans to cast the omnibus spending package as filled with pork, Think Progress makes mention of nine GOP members of Congress who have piled pork into the very bill they are decrying.  Top amongst them, as Political Correction makes note, is Sen. Roger Wicker from Mississippi.  Wicker, all by his lonesome, has almost 200 earmarks in the bill totaling more than $415 million.

None of that stopped Wicker or his cohorts from going on Fox News the past two days and railing against a spending bill they have helped fatten, and in the case of Sen. Wicker, almost single handily.

Not Just Hypocrisy But a Sickness

On Tuesday senate leadership unveiled a year-end omnibus spending bill to get the federal government through the rest of the fiscal year worth about $1.2 trillion.  As nearly every spending bill in congress does, this one too has pork money in it-- about $8 billion in earmarked projects according to John McCain.

Fox News runs the story that the entire bill is "pork."  Just not true.  Not even close to being true.  In fact, if you take John McCain's word for it that means less than 1% of the total spending bill is earmarked.  But not for Fox News and the GOP. Anything that comes from Democrats is pork money.  And according to Fox News it's the Republican caucus that is fighting to prevent the bill from passing and saving America.

What a day this is.  It's rare that such a clear example of how the GOP department of misinformation works.

The last year the Republicans controlled congress, 2006, the GOP swept through over 13,000 earmarked projects worth over $29 billion, the most in history.

But that is ancient history right?  This isn't, however.

The omnibus bill is full of Republican pork projects.  It's not just Democratic earmarks.  The two Republican senators, John Cornyn, R-Texas, and John Thune, R-S.D, who called a press conference exclaiming America can't afford the pork bill have earmarks in the bill!  This is amazing.  Republicans hold a press conference decrying a spending bill for having pork money when over a 1/3 of the pork is theirs!

If Republicans were so against pork they would not have put it in the bill.  What they are doing, however, is throwing billions of dollars of pork into a spending bill and then making it look like all of it is because of the Democrats-- and then running press conferences pretending to be fighting a Revolution! against pork spending.  This is a derangement Baghdad Bob would be proud of.

Second Court This Week Applies Constitution to 21st Century

Yesterday another federal court of appeals shot down the government's attempt to obtain digital communication without a warrant. This time the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the government cannot obtain cell-site information that mobile-phone carriers retain on their customers without a court ordered warrant thus solidifying the 4th Amendment does pertain to the 21st century.

This marks the second time this week a federal court has ruled against the government's attempt to acquire digital information on citizens without a warrant. The court has held both times the 4th Amendment must be allowed to progress with technology or wither and die.

Like I said yesterday, this is probably an issue self-proclaimed conservatives will agree the Constitution does apply to 21st century America even though the words digital, computer, cell phone, antenna, etc. never appear anywhere in the Constitution.  This proves Republicans only want to adopt a strict, Founder's intent on issues they don't agree with like health care and social programs.  Their argument the Constitution is being applied too broadly is a lazy attempt to muck up the issue.  In reality, they just don't agree with the issue-- or the party enacting the issue.

Court Upholds Living Document Version of Constitution

What's this? The Constitution applies to our privacy???

A U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled the government must obtain a court warrant to require internet service providers to turn over stored e-mail to authorities. My favorite part of the ruling: The court directly stated, "the Fourth Amendment must keep pace with the inexorable march of technological progress, or its guarantees will wither and perish." Ya think? Of course the Constitution,-- all parts of it-- must keep pace with progress.

This is one of my favorite debates with self-professed conservatives.  Many believe that unless something is directly stated in the Constitution that it is not a power of the federal government but one delegated to the states.  In theory, such a notion of the Constitution is that it's dead, or not a living document that should or can be applied broadly.  Our health care debate is but the most recent example of conservative Republican uproar about the Constitution and its direct expressions.  Just because the Constitution does not directly state the words health care or public option, Republicans believe it treasonous for anyone but them to undertake HCR.

I have never bought into this often debunked theory of the Constitution.  Of course the Constitution is a living document that must change with the times.  Yesterday's court of appeals ruling confirms it.   The words email or computer or technology never appear in the document but that doesn't mean the Constitution doesn't protect our right to privacy when utilizing modern features of society.  Needless to say, this might be one area where Republicans would actually argue the Constitution does protect our privacy when it comes to emails.  Squaring that with how modernity isn't reflected in the Constitution with other issues is highly delusional in their ideology.

For instance, the 2nd Amendment is one area of the Constitution most Republicans want applied broadly and with the most up to date words, expressions and lingo.  Yet the Founders never envisioned today's weaponry and obviously did not intend for people to own anything more than a single shot muzzle.  If you apply the "dead theory" to the 2nd Amendment Republican ideology is but a facade covering items they merely don't agree with, and certainly doesn't give anyone the right to own the firearms we possess today.  Yet it's one they envision was granted to us by God, so it's okay for this part of the Constitution to survive the march of progress.

So next time you hear a Republican praise the modern view that the Constitution protects our private emails, ask them why doesn't it protect our right to affordable health care.

Terrified of the Dark Disguised as Small Government Conservatism

Since when did small government conservatism entail complete media censorship and executing people we disagree with? Just check out the latest round of GOP reaction to WikiLeaks:

God's Servant, Mike Huckabee, says whoever leaked info should be put to death. Very Christian of him.

Tea Bagger Sarah Palin says we should treat it like al Qaeda and smoke them out. Actually, if we treat it like we did al Qaeda we would send hundreds of thousands of troops after someone who had absolutely nothing to do with the leaks.  Bite that off and chew it Sarah.

Newly elected Republican Allen West says we should censor all media from allowing them to report on what is revealed in the leaks; because, after all, the leaks represent a serious crime and those reporting on them are aiding and abetting.  He's a tea bagger favorite in case you were wondering.

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says we should change the laws to allow for some sort of prosecution of Assange, since he's a terrorist and all.  Isn't changing our laws to limit freedoms exactly what "terrorists" want us to do???

These are our leading small government conservatives!  There's nothing small government about a government that censors media stories unfavorable to the republic.  There's nothing whatsoever small government about a government that puts to death people it disagrees with.  Moreover, despite what brainless Sarah Palin says, in what world does small government have anything to do with spending trillions of dollars smoking out evildoers?  And there's certainly nothing small government about changing laws just so we can prosecute people with motives we don't necessarily agree with.  Yet this is the modern small government crowd in America today.  Their ideas represent a movement mascaraing as conservatism and have nothing to do with traditionalism.

These are the people that are labeled by our very Serious media as "small government conservatives."  But there's nothing small government about them. Everything about their ideas is authoritarian and tyrannical.  They are scared of their own shadows and anything in the dark that might go boo.  They are a destructive force bent merely on their own accomplishments.  The only thing small about them is their care for this country.

The Individual Mandate and Why I Don't Care

Yesterday's federal court ruling by Judge Henry Hudson has made plenty of headlines. People on the right point to it as proof President Obama should resign. People on the left point to it as proof judges are just as ideologically biased as the rest of us. And people in the middle want cheaper insurance and are tired of paying for those who don't. It's quite the labyrinth of politics to be certain.

In addition to being a George W. Bush appointee, Judge Hudson also has a financial stake in the personal mandate being ruled unconstitutional. He's part owner of a Republican consulting firm hired to lobby against Democratic health care reform. Quite the conflict of interest to say the least.  Yet that hasn't stopped Republicans from jumping for joy at his ruling.  In the long run, it wouldn't matter if they had their drug addicted Rush Limbaugh ruling on health care reform, because in the end it's going to come down to one or two Justices on the Supreme Court to finally decide what is or isn't within the legal limits of the Constitution.

But the left is putting way too much focus on the personal mandate in my opinion. There are no shortages of ideas to getting around the concept of a personal mandate that will make the rest of the health care reform package effective as ever.

In short let's review why the mandate is necessary in the first place.  Without the requirement that everyone have a minimum amount of health care insurance, people will wait until they are sick before purchasing insurance.  This will cause the only people in the health care pools to be sick people. Thus forcing premiums to skyrocket.  Let's be honest, what keeps prices down are healthy people.  The more healthy people in the pool the cheaper the rates.

So how do we get around this without making people feel as if government is burdening them yet again with a mandate they feel they'll never use?  Easily enough, just let people opt out of the mandate.  But if they do, they ain't getting back in.  At least not for 5-7 years.  If they become sick and need insurance they can go through Medicaid or fork out money to pay their new premiums, which I'm sure will be high if they are even allowed back in the private insurance pool.  Dare I say all this might create a sense of personal responsibility? That will make individuals appreciate the fact that government is trying to actually alleviate the situation rather than burdening them.  Most people will never realize such a simple concept mainly because Fox News will never tell it like that.  You don't appreciate health insurance until you don't have it, and that's a fact.

Another way around it is one I wrote about last month.  It's a plan submitted by Republicans and Democrats that would speed up the waiver date for states to opt-out.  This will allow states to create their own version of HCR.  If the states do good and create a program cheaper and better than the federal system, then they get to keep it and enjoy the copy cats that will latch on to their program from all over the country.  If the state fails to create a better system, then they'll be backed up by a federal system that is already in place (I'm looking at you Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas).  The more liberal states can have their personal mandate and the more Patriotic conservative Republican states can have their 'tough guy wait till the last minute plans'.  To each their own.  But if yours fails, then we get to call you a loser and make fun of you like we have pretty much since 1776.

To wrap this up, I think the personal mandate will be upheld by the Supreme Court.  I just don't think the political insistence that it is the backbone of HCR is necessary. At least not in terms of making the federal government look as if it is creating an even bigger nanny state.  Government need not be a bully.  And if it really wants to create innovation the best way to do that is to allow freedom of thought and a little creativity by the states.  A little creativity by our representatives wouldn't hurt either but that might be too much to ask.

But I Can't Feed on the Powerless When My Cup's Already Overfilled

One thing is for certain, the GOP won't go hungry any time soon. The real question is will there be any room left for tea?

WE All Would be remiss if we didn't mention the Patriotic fact the GOP rode to power in the House of Representatives on the myth that they had learned their lesson from days gone by.  Early indications are the GOP learned it didn't spend near enough.  They seemed poised not to make the same mistake twice three times.

To lead the House financial services committee Republicans chose Rep. Spencer "Big Bank" Bachus from Alabama.  Mr. Bachus is no stranger to big spending.  He loves pork spending.  He voted for TARP twice-- a big tea bagger no no.  He voted for the unfunded trillion dollar expansion to Medicare.  He voted for the very popular and successful Cash for Clunkers, another tea bagger groining shot.  And he firmly believes tax cuts do not have to be offset or paid for.  Remember, in Republican circles, Bahcus is a "numbers guy."  So we all should take a big sigh of relief.

To chair the House Appropriations Committee Republicans selected Rep. Harold Rogers of Kentucky.  Rogers is best known in his home district by his hometown newspaper's nickname of the "Prince of Pork."  He's requested almost a trillion dollars in pork in the last five years alone.  135 earmarked projects in just the last two years!  As if that's not enough to solidify his fiscal conservatism, Rogers directed some $17 million in pork money to an airport in his district that really doesn't exist.  $17 million for an airport to nowhere?  Wheee!

Now remember, don't ever bring any of this up.  This is the New and Improved GOP.  They are fighting a Revolution! in this country to save us from the evil islamoterroristfascistliberals.  If we mention the past, we are only proving that we are not Serious and Patriotic Americans.  My goodness, it's not like it wasn't just two years ago the Republicans turned over to the new Democratic administration a $1.4 trillion deficit.  Ancient history people.  Get with the program.

Republican Judge Rules Individual Mandate Unconstitutional

A federal judge in Virginia, appointed by George W. Bush, has ruled the individual mandate unconstitutional.

Safe to say this case was court shopped by Virginia's Republican Attorney General to precisely be heard by a Republican judge.  No doubt this will go all the way to the Supreme Court before it's all finished.

You're Still Living in My World People

Last but not least, it should be noted that the individual mandate was a Republican proposal dating all the way back to 1993.  When it was their idea they had no problems with it and swore up and down it was Constitutional.  But since it was enacted by a Democratic president and passed by a Democratic Congress it is, by all means, against Liberty and Freedom.  In case you can't see me, I'm flipping a big fat bird right at ya you weasel Republicans.

As it stands, three federal judges have ruled on the various aspects of Obama's HCR.  Today's ruling is the only one to rule any part of the reform package as unconstitutional.  Did I mention the judge is a George W. Bush appointee??

Oh We're in Charge??

So with a month to go in their total domination of government Democrats decide to get tough with their agenda and priorities? I'm not buying it for one bit. You are turning power over to people who think tax cuts don't have to be paid for and while in charge of the House last time never passed one single spending bill that was funded. Little late for finding both balls.

GOP: Deficits Don't Matter When We Add to Them

Freedom Fighting Republican Member of Congress Michelle Bachmann on why tax cuts shouldn't count toward the deficit:

BACHMANN: And remember it's a deficit to government but it's not a deficit to people who get to keep their money. So it's how you frame it. I don't think letting people keep their own money should be considered a deficit.

JOHN ROBERTS [CNN]: But it is, though, because it adds to the federal deficit.

BACHMANN: No, you're right about that, John, that it is to the government, but remember what we could also be doing right now: Cutting back on spending. We've had the biggest increase in spending in the last two years that anyone can remember in modern times. We can also cut back spending to that level and that's not on the table right now.

Since her prized legislation will be the largest increase to the federal deficit since the Bush tax cuts were rammed through Congress in 2001, Bachmann wants to change the definition of "deficit."

VIEIRA [The View]: But how — how do you justify adding more money to the deficit, that much more?

BACHMANN: Well remember, that money is — when people are allowed to keep their own money, that's considered a deficit. I don't — I don't agree with that definition. When people keep their own money, that's considered a deficit to government, but it's not a deficit to your pocket or mine, so I think it's important that people can keep their money.

So she admits cutting taxes adds to the deficit. But doesn't want to define it that way since it will allow people to keep more money.

In the reality-based community the only way for tax cuts not to add to the deficit is if spending levels are adjusted to make up for the loss of revenue. When asked point blank just a few weeks ago by Anderson Cooper on CNN what she would cut from the budget Rep. Bachmann could not name one single program she would cut.  But yes, let's change the definition of "deficit" just in time for people like Bachmann to takeover.  This is going to be a fun two years.

Clinton Back in the Press Room

President Obama brought in former President Bill Clinton to talk tax plan.



Awesome!

If he could run again, he'd beat anyone hands down.

Republicans Again Filibuster Repeal of DADT

GOP blocks senate vote to repeal DADT--  legislation almost 70% of Americans support.

How Long? Not Long!

I sat down to write a completely different post. As I was writing I had a recording of a key portion of President Obama's press conference playing in a different tab. Listening to his presser, I had to delete my whole post and start over because what I was writing was not meshing with what he was saying.

I can't help but again think back to a Q&A session I was at with State Senator Obama and how that lone event has shaped my opinion of him, his ideology and his politics. I've written before that it was then I realized he wasn't a person willing to be labeled any other way than by his actions.

Listening to President Obama cast aside liberal and progressive ideals in order to compromise is really my strongest opinion of him and it correlates well with everything I've known to believe about him.  I've said numerous times that I have never viewed Barack Obama as all that liberal.  If anything he was a master at cutting that thin middle line.  All of that has been blurred by countless hours of Fox News and hate radio painting him as the most liberal person to ever walk the earth. But in reality, his pragmatism has always been more moderate than he's given credit for.  I know because I was there.

It shows today in his press conference.  It shows today in his compromise with the GOP to extend all the Bush tax cuts for two more years.  And it shows in his presidency to do something rather than nothing at all even at the expense of what many may consider his strongest supporters.

Looking back to 2004 when I got to know the person behind Barack Obama, I see that person as clear as ever at today's press conference.  It's refreshing to me to see Obama the realist is still there and being leader of the free world hasn't caused him to lose sight of how far we've come and how long we have yet to travel.  How long? Not long.

Where I Stand and Breaking the Cardinal Rule

I get a lot of emails from readers asking me where I stand on the so-called hot topic issues of the day.  I didn't think this made much difference.  Apparently people want to know.  I will tell you right now the number one rule in political communication is never show your cards.  Anyone will tell you that you should keep people guessing on issues that are polarizing like abortion, guns, gay rights and so on.  To honor many reader requests, I will reveal some of my personal stances on some issues knowing full well I'm breaking a huge rule and a personal policy of mine.

• Guns-- I almost unwaveringly support the 2nd Amendment and thoroughly believe it applies to the individual.  I think gun laws suck and do nothing but the opposite of their intentions.

• Gay Rights-- Let them marry.  I'm all for it.  I used to be against it until I learned gay marriage was only for gay people.  Repeal DADT.

• Abortion-- I personally oppose abortion.  But I've never been pregnant so it's an easy answer for me.

• Marijuana-- Legalize it now.

• Health Care-- I support a single payer system.  I support opening Medicare up to everyone that wants to buy into it.  And I support a public option.  

• Climate Change-- No doubt I believe in doing what we can to conserve our planet.  I don't necessarily believe in Global Warming but I do believe in climate change.

• Death Penalty-- I'm for it and against it.  I waver a lot on this one.  I don't think everyone who kills should be killed but I do think some crime is so abhorrent tax money shouldn't be used to keep them alive.

That's all you're getting from me.  Hope this helps.  Actually, if you read this blog for any length of time you could have figured these out without much trouble.  

Deal in the Works on Tax Cuts?

So says people smarter than me.

Here's where I stand on the tax cuts. I'm for extending them for people and families making less than $250K. I'm for extending them to people making less than one million. I'm for extending them to people who make more than one million. It really doesn't matter.  Here's why:

The only way to really get serious about the budget deficit is to let the tax cuts expire for everyone.  Doing that is neither feasible nor going to happen in this climate.  So just do whatever.  Extend them for the middle class; extend them for millionaires; extend them for billionaires; extend them for everyone because it really doesn't matter since there is no possibility of returning back to the Clinton-era tax rates.  I really don't understand the big fuss from Democrats on this one.

Dems apparently want to act outraged that all brackets will be extended.  Where was the outrage when the public option was dropped?  Where was the outrage when Republicans filibustered DADT?  Where was this outrage when a Republican posted a socialist indoctrinated photo of President Obama on the House Floor?  But now, you want to pretend you are outraged when your plan that will do next to nothing to solve the budget deficit is being compromised by the very opposition party you have allowed to only grow stronger?  Get real Dems.  Get real.

Gaslight Anthem Still Rocks

I didn't realize Brian Fallon was this tatted up.

GOP Leader: Change Law to Prosecute People We Label as Terrorists

I have absolutely no sympathy for Julian Assange. If you knowingly publish material that a government may find to be secret, you're taking your chances. But he is not a terrorist and he is not a traitor since he isn't even an American. But stupidity is not something the current crop of GOP leaders have went a day without. Exhibit A, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell:

"I think the man is a high-tech terrorist," McConnell said. "He's done enormous damage to our country, and I think he needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and if that becomes a problem, we need to change the law. It's done enormous damage to our country and to our allies around the world."

What an idiot.  Change the law so we can prosecute someone Mitch McConnell doesn't like.  How's that for small government conservatism?

Next Wave of Nullifying President Obama?

My boy Dave Weigel reports the next phase from Republicans in trying to nullify the election of President Obama is a little trickery called Interstate Compacts.

These Freedom Fighting Agreements are contracts between Red States that say they will not enforce Obama's laws and will make such enforcement of his evil socialism a crime.

"Take that existing framework," Dranias suggested to a room of state legislators this morning. "Make any violation by anyone of those rights a criminal offense, pair up with a state that thinks like you on the same topics, make sure they criminalize any violation of those rights, and reach a compact. Lodge it with Congress. And then bring on the fight when the IRS comes in and tries to penalize people for not following the individual mandate."

This sounds like a great plan.  Can we do it with No Child Left Behind?  The Patriot Act?  How about Bush's orders to send our sons and daughters to fight endless Glorious War?  No wait, how about for Bush's completely unfunded huge expansion to Medicare that adds nearly a trillion dollars to the deficit?  Can we apply this excellent Patriotic concept to any of those?  Of course not.  Those were enacted by Great Republicans and therefore are next to cleanliness in the hierarchy of Godliness. Something like this only applies to Democratic administrations.

It seems to me all of this state's rights, federalism, Big Government, supremacy clause stuff could easily be solved if we would just allow Republicans back in charge. I don't recall hearing anything about the 10th amendment, state's rights, nullification, or interstate contracts when Bush & Co. were in charge.

Seems like the easiest way to fix it all is for Democrats to resign from power immediately and just let Republicans have full authority over everything.

At least then would we could get past this silly episode and focus on more important things like two ongoing endless wars, a huge budget deficit, an exploding federal debt, an economy in crisis and outrageous gas prices...Hold up... those problems were created by Bush & Co. Oh well. No more tentherism at least.  Viva Bush!

Republicans Filibuster Middle Class Tax Cuts

The self labeled small government, tax slashing party successfully filibustered two pieces of senate legislation that would have permanently cut taxes for the middle class. Over 60% of Americans support the legislation but Republicans are mad that millionaires don't get permanent tax breaks too.

Obama Has Shrunk the Deficit, Cut Pork Spending and Grown the Private Sector: Anyone Paying Attention?

This is going to shock some people, and cause Republicans to pretend it's not happening. In their World, it of course won't be happening because Fox News is never going to mention these three items: President Obama has shrunk the budget deficit by over $120 billion; cut pork barrel spending to levels not seen in a decade; and is growing the private sector much more so than the public sector.

The next time you hear a Republican say that we need to grow the private sector and not the public sector; or that if Obama would spend more time growing the private sector instead of socializing our country; or hear a Republican/conservative whine and cry about cutting the deficit; or hear a tea bagging Republican stroking off to evil government pork spending, your answer should be President Obama is doing just that.

I challenge any Republican to show me where any Republican president cut the deficit, cut pork spending and grew the private sector all in one year. I dare ya!

Real Talk About Being Proud of the President

Going through my email inbox this week has been a lesson in humility and patience. First off, I apologize to those I still haven't gotten around to replying to, both friends and people I have never met. This mad rush between Thanksgiving and Christmas always seems to be a less than relaxing time as all of us discover we have less and less time to mark to-do's off our list.  On top of that, which I rarely mention on my blog, is I have one year old twin boys at home; I work a full time job and we are in the process of selling our home with hopes of moving to a bigger one very soon.  It's just a crazy time in general but in life as well.

Most of my emails this week have centered around the question of would I still vote for Obama today.  After a perplexed, almost gasping, shaking of my head I most astutely and proudly answer YES.

These are not emails from Republicans or crazed readers that never use spell check. I've had actual left of center and liberal friends ask me this question while telling me they don't think they would.  That's fine.  Your vote is your vote and this blog is not at all the place to sway voters.  But c'mon let's be realistic.

I'm amazed by the perceptions today of the presidency.  I think this would be happening no matter which Democrat held the office because of the nature of today's media.  But let's get right down to it.  Obama is still a popular president.  His approvals are higher than Reagan's and Clinton's at their respective time in office. Lest we forget too, that our last president left office with a 26% approval rating. Republicans would have killed for Bush to have had a 48% approval like the most recent poll shows the current president having.

There's no doubt in my mind if Bush would have had even a horrible 35% approval all we would hear is how great of a job he did.  But our president today has an approval 22 points higher than his predecessors so it's not like we are anywhere near the Republican level of disapproval like this country went through for almost 6 years.

With that said, I'm thrilled to death Obama is our president.  I personally know the guy.  I can tell my twin boys "hey your dad knew the President of the United States." I'm proud of it.  I support the job he is doing.  That doesn't mean I agree with everything he does because I don't.  But I cherish the fact that I can disagree with the president and my party and still be considered an American.  It's one of the very reasons I vote Democratic like it's going out of style.  I think this country is lucky to have Obama as president and I think he's doing a very difficult job as well as he can. I don't regret my vote one bit and will, without a doubt, vote for him in 2012.

It's not all doom and gloom and the perception that liberals and moderate Dems are fleeing ship is both wrong and retarded.  Obama passed real health care reform.  He passed a huge stimulus bill that saved the country from a Depression.  He lived up to his promise on Iraq.  He's doing all he can with Afghanistan, yet another left over Bush mess.  He signed credit card reform, student loan reform, Cash for Clunkers, START, and so many more accomplishments that should have anyone glad that he's president.

So yes I don't always agree with him.  I don't always walk the party line.  I don't always wait and see how the administration is going to react before I do.  But I'd take him any day over any other Democrat or Republican this country has to offer. I'd vote for him twice in 2012 if I could.  I'm proud he's our president and I'm more proud that we have, as a nation, returned to the days where we can criticize the president and not be called anti-American.  You're my boy blue.  And I'm not going anywhere.

House Democrats Pass Middle Class Tax Cuts

By a vote of 234-188 Speaker Pelosi advances legislation that will allow Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy to expire while extending them for families making less than $250,000.  On to the Senate.

Pork Report is In and Republicans Top the Charts Again

The 2010 Citizen's Against Government Waste Pig Book is out and it's full of wonderful tidbits of perfectly sane fiscal conservatism.

Four of the top five pork states are states that voted for John McCain in 2008 including Sarah Palin's very own Alaska.  In other words, these are the states where the voters despise pork spending remember. Six of the top ten are red states also.

Since Democrats took over Congress in 2007, pork spending has dropped dramatically.  It rose every year Republicans had complete control over government.

This year was the lowest total number of pork projects in almost a decade.  But remember Democrats are evil liberal spenders.  If you leave out the actual real data that's a true statement.

Tea Bagger Caucus Requested Over $1 Billion in Earmarks, This Session Alone!

The very brave and Patriotic Super American Freedom Fighting House Caucus, also known as the Tea Bagger Caucus to us layman, requested over $1 billion in pork funding just this session of Congress.

In the grand sum of things, $1 billion is but a drop in the bucket of the federal budget. But the tea baggers are the people who claim to be the crusaders of small government and fiscal conservatism.  And their loudest rallying cry?  An end to pork spending.

Here's how all this will turn out.  Since the tea bagger caucus is Republican the rank and file tea baggers won't care at all that their politburo is doing the exact opposite of what they claim to support.  Soon, though, a Republican, probably via Fox News, will blast a report that shows Democrats have spent billions on earmarks and tea baggers will pretend to be fiscally concerned and irate about wasteful spending.

Illinois General Assembly Approves Civil Unions

The good thing about civil union laws is they allow you to legally be with the person you want to be with and not the person someone else wants you to be with. The bad news is it's still not full marriage equality. It is a step in the right direction, however.

When Gov. Pat Quinn signs a law allowing same sex couples to enter into civil unions granting them very basic legal protections heterosexual couples enjoy, Illinois will be the 6th State in the Union allowing such. It's a good day for equal rights here in Illinois.

The credit largely belongs to Gov. Pat Quinn because without his election last month none of this would have been possible.  Credit should also be extended to those lawmakers that kept their promise and voted in favor of advancing the State of Illinois into the 21st century.

*Update:

It's also worth mentioning that today's sole senate Republican vote came from Dan Rutherford, a gay man.  Sen. Rutherford was elected to statewide office as the next State Treasurer in November.  Congrats to Sen. Rutherford on his victory and his courage to do the right thing today.  I've spent some time with Sen. Rutherford drinking at Nora Bandy's and at some social gatherings at his home, which is beautiful by the way.  He should be given credit for his "yea" vote today.

GOP Senate Minority Vows Obstruction Until Its Policies are Adopted

Sen. Mitch McConnell

Only in bizzaro world does the minority get to decide what's best for everyone. But that's just what Senate Republicans are insisting should happen.

Via a letter signed by all 42 Senate Republicans, the minority party is demanding they get to legislate for the entire country:

"Last month, the American people issued their verdict on the Democrat's priorities," replied Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky. "We need to show the American people that we care more about them and their ability to pay their bills than we do about the special interests' legislative Christmas-list."

It doesn't work this way.  Even come January when the GOP gets to increase its share of senate seats, they will still be not only the minority in the senate but in the whole government.  Democrats will control the White House and the Senate. Republicans only the house.

Moreover, Sen. McConnell is absolutely wrong about the American people issuing a verdict on Democratic priorities, especially in terms of who won what.  Republicans did not gain a majority in the chamber McConnell belongs.  That means what your party may view as a priority was not accepted by the American people for advancement in your chamber of government.  You are still the minority Mr. McConnell.  Pretend all you want, but you are not in charge.  Your policies do not placed above the majorities.

Also, when you pledge to block all bills until you get your way it's called obstructionism.  The press should label it as such.

Furthermore, the ability of 42 senators to block anything and hold the upper chamber hostage is proof positive that filibuster reform must a priority for the next session. When the minority can prance around on their twinkle toes while crying until they get their way, then there's really something wrong with the functionality of government.