Conservatism. Too Many Definitions and November is Fast Approaching by Craig Covello

Loyal Reader and Friends:  I am finally back from a long four month trip to Thailand where I was shooting my feature film entitled, "Elephant White."  The film which stars Kevin Bacon and Djimon Hounsou is currently in post-production and will be complete sometime in December.  Now, that I am home and relaxed, I will get back to writing at least one article per week for this column.  Again, I want to thank Ira Schwartz and Craig Covello for keeping this column going while I was away.

I'm hoping to have an article posted sometime mid-week.  In the meantime, here is one more article by Craig regarding the definition of a Conservative.  I think it is very well thought out and addresses a lot of points to make one think . . . . .

I was having a conversation with a friend of mine last week when, admittedly, I steered towards politics. I should know better. When it comes to politics, I believe we share many conservative viewpoints. He wants to keep his own money, live his own life-style and raise his kids as he see fit without government intervention. Yet when I suggest the obvious, his response is typically something along the lines of "that doesn't make me a conservative!". So it started me thinking, is there a generally accepted standard defining conservatism? After a little research on the Internet, it appears that Wikipedia lists no less than seven definitions:

• Christian conservatism — Conservative Christians are primarily interested in family values.

• Neoconservatism — A modern form of conservatism that supports a more assertive, interventionist foreign policy, aimed at promoting democracy abroad.

• Limited government conservatism — Limited government conservatives look for a decreased role of the federal government. They follow Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in their suspicion of a powerful federal government.

• Paleoconservatism — Arising in the 1980s in reaction to neoconservatism, stresses tradition, especially Christian tradition and the importance to society of the traditional family. Paleoconservatives are generally isolationist, and suspicious of foreign influence.

• Libertarian conservatism or Fusionism— Emphasizes a strict interpretation of the Constitution, particularly with regard to federal power.

• Fiscal conservatives support limited government, limited taxation, and a balanced budget.

• Social conservatism is generally dominated by defense of traditional social norms and values, of local customs and of societal evolution, rather than social upheaval.

Of course, Wikipedia is not the final word on any topic, so I decided to do a little more digging by looking for core conservative principles. Anthony Martin of the Columbia Conservative Examiner offers his top-ten list:

1. 'Government money' does not belong to government. It belongs to the taxpayers who worked hard for it, and who had funds deleted from their paychecks even before they got to see them. 

2. The government that governs best governs LEAST.

3. Government normally does not solve problems. People do. Big government usually IS the problem.

4. Oppressive large governments are responsible for more murders of citizens than all of the wars in history.

5. The private sector is where the juice of society lies. There you will find ingenuity, creativity, and the creation of wealth--provided government gets out of the way.

6. Government social programs reward pathological dependency. True adults, unless hindered by debilitating physical impairment, seek independent living as free persons who are not stuck in an infantile dependency on the government nanny.

7. The one role of government mandated by the U.S. Constitution is to provide for the national defense.

8. Human rights are not granted by government. They are inherent and automatic. We are 'endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights.' Government can only choose to recognize and protect those inherent rights.

9. The right to self-defense, as encapsulated in the 2nd Amendment, is the key to all of the other rights described in the Bill of Rights. Free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, and a free press are secured and kept secure by an armed citizenry.

10. Our form of government is NOT a 'pure democracy' or 'majority rule.' In a Constitutional Republic such as ours, the will of the majority is tempered and limited by the rights of the minority, which are always intact and unalienable regardless of the 'will of the majority.'

The Patriot Journal takes a somewhat more simplistic approach by listing three core conservative principles:

Faith:

Faith in God is the most important principle. God provides the moral stability that every standard of conduct is based.

Honor:

Your word is paramount in this world. A true Conservative would never let their honor come into question. Personal accountability is never an issue. You do what you promise to do and expect the same from others. You live by example always.

Patriotism:

Americans now are enjoying the fruits of labor of 233 years, and generations of blood, sweat, and tears of American ancestry before them. A lot of respect is due. As a patriot you believe that the country created by the Declaration of Independence and governed by the Constitution is just, and does not need radical change from the vision of the founders.

Political commentator Mark Liven has his own top 10 list of conservative principles:

1. America is guided by morality, having an origin in God.

2. The U.S. Constitution is not a “living and breathing document.”...It is the defining document which enables our rights, and delegates the powers to each branch of the U.S. Government, as well as to the states of the Union.

3. The Free Market fosters creativity and inventiveness.

4. Entitlement programs tend to be intergenerational swindles that threaten the well-being of future generations with massive financial obligation incurred from benefits received by today’s generation.

5. Illegal immigration is against the law, and threatens our security, morality and traditions as a nation.

6. Enviro-statism is a threat to freedom and its citizens.....With the assistance of a pliant or sympathetic media, the Statist uses junk science, misrepresentations, and fear-mongering to promote public health and environmental scares...

7. The Tenth Amendment is not to be ignored; rather, it is that amendment which was to keep the intent of the Declaration of Independence. ....States are more likely to better reflect the interests of their citizens than the federal government.

8. Self Preservation is the reason for public policy. Conservatives understand that the reason for public policy is for the preservation and improvement of American society. It cannot be made in an experimental attempt to rush us into a Utopian society.

9. Conservative activism must be maintained at all times to keep Americans educated....“The conservative must become more engaged in public matters.

10. Americans have the right to keep the fruit of his own labors.... taxes must be reduced to give people and business more disposable incomes. ... the progressive income tax must go. ... All residents must be required to pay the tax so they have a stake in limiting its abuse.

And finally, Mike Huckabee has his own list of 10 principles:

1. Lower taxes are better than higher taxes.

2. The purpose of government is to protect us, not to provide for us. We should provide for ourselves.

3. The best government is self-government.

4. If there must be a form of civil government, it should be as limited as possible and as local as possible. The most local government is ideal in that it is closer to those being governed and therefore more accountable to the governed.

5. Peace for a nation is best achieved by having a superior military capacity than those who pose a threat.

6. Government should facilitate and not complicate the free enterprise system.

7. Excessive taxation, regulation and unmitigated litigation lead to job migration. Government intervention and regulation should be the court of last resort and not the first option in anything.

8. Mothers and fathers raise better children than governments do.

9. Government should undergrid the basic family structure and not undermine it.

10. The Constitution and the Bill of rights were written to limit and restrict government from interfering with the right s of it citizens, not to keep citizens from exercising their rights.

By now, you're probably dizzy with various definitions of conservatism, so I won't bother including The Mount Vernon Statement, the Tea Party's Contract from America, or several other definitions of conservatism found in various websites. You should be aware, however, of a few fringe conservative views posted on the Internet which many mainstream conservatives would challenge:

• The statement that the United States is a European country and Americans are part of the European people.

• Conservative values include the protection of the environment and natural heritage.

• Conservatism supports America's national interest in advancing freedom and opposing tyranny in the world.

• If you want peace, prepare for war.

• Fundamentalist Muslims and Socialists are enemies of the state and must have no power or public influence on any law or custom in this nation.

• There are times when interference in the affairs of foreign nations are necessary for American security.

Analysis?

There are simply too many different descriptions of conservatism, and a few even seem to contradict each other. But that's not surprising since there appears to be at least seven different types of conservative definitions in this country. Why should we care? Because we are rapidly approaching the 2010 elections, and unless the Republican Party starts to do some heavy lifting in defining what it stands for, the moderates in America will be confused by all this noise. The Tea Party cannot shoulder sole responsibility for carrying the conservative message forward. It must be refined by the Republican Party. Sean Hannity may have the right idea by insisting that Republicans create a contract with America. It should be in simple terms so that it can be easily communicated to most citizens without room for excessive interpretation. Mike Huckabee's list might fit the bill.

Make no mistake. The progressives who currently are in control the federal government will use the radical's well-established technique of saying the exact opposite of reality. This website has chronicled literally hundreds of facts for the sole purpose of helping us remember the past 18 months of progressive rule. My fear, however, is that some moderate Americans will be so worn down by the corruption and deliberate obfuscation of facts by the Obama White House, that they may lose hope for America and avoid the polls altogether. The only way to stop this from happening is to continue to beat the drum of conservative optimism while exposing the progressives agenda for what it is: Total control over virtually every aspect of our lives by use of governmental force. The words of manufacturing czar Ron Bloom come to mind: "We kind of agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of the gun". All Americans need to be reminded of that statement in November.

It also might be appropriate to remind them of the words spoken by President Ronald Reagan -

"The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom......We're still Jefferson's children. Freedom is not created by Government, nor is it a gift from those in political power. It is, in fact, secured, more than anything else, by limitations placed on those in Government."

I could not have said that any better myself. Let's hope the Republican Party crafts a simplified conservative message now so that it will be understood in November.

Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics

As I said yesterday, this movement is not going away. The Republicans should embrace it as quickly as possible and make its goals part of their platform.

Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics

Lemmings by Ira Schwartz

Well the healthcare “summit” is over and between you and me I probably could have found a better use for my time then sitting in front of my TV and watching it. However we did learn several things from this media event. The Republicans are not dead but are rather quite alive and feisty and despite what President Obama has said he has no interest what so ever in working with the Republicans on healthcare. Watching the President yesterday was like watching a spoiled brat who owned the only baseball telling the rest of the kids you either play by my rules or you don’t play at all.

I was surprised to hear him admit that the American people were angry at Washington but then I realized he might have said it but clearly didn’t believe it. This point was driven home later when the President told the Republicans and I’m paraphrasing, that they had six weeks to get on board or the Democrats will pass the bill without them. The dreaded reconciliation. Though the bill would probably pass the Senate most analysts believe it will not get out of the House. His flippant remark regarding the elections in November, “Whatever happens in November happens in November” (paraphrasing again) shows how really out of touch this administration really is. One of the Democrats even had the audacity to say that they (Democrats) have been doing this a long time and they know what we’re doing. Well a new Rasmussen poll indicates 56% of the population disagrees.

Now that the debate is over we need to put this all in perspective. Everyone agrees that insurance companies must not be allowed to continue doing business as usual. Regulations need to be put in place to prevent things like the 39% rate increase Anthem Blue Cross of California just inflicted on its policy holders. Both the federal government and the California Insurance commissioner have asked Anthem to explain the increase. As of today they have yet to answer. Things like this cannot be allowed to continue. The Insurance companies need to be reigned in and made accountable for their actions. They have made huge profits on the backs of their policy holders and healthcare providers and still scream poverty. California State Attorney General, Jerry Brown, subpoenaed yesterday, the financial records for the seven largest health insurance companies doing business in California. They have 30 days to comply. It appears at least one state is looking out for its citizens.

Our present healthcare system is one of the best in the world. Better equipment has lead to early detection of most deadly diseases. Early detection means a better chance of survival. Access to this early detection and treatment is possible only because of our present healthcare system. And it appears most of us are happy with our present plans.

A recent gallop poll indicates that 87% of Americans with health insurance are happy with their plans. 82% of people on Medicare and Medicaid also say their healthcare coverage is good to excellent. According to CNN 15% of all Americans, roughly 45 million presently don’t have any health insurance. That’s 1 in 8 Americans. According to the US Census Bureau of those 45 million 9.7 million are not citizens of the United States. The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) reports another 14 million are insurable through Medicare and SCHIP but didn’t bother to enroll. The Census also shows 18.3 million are under the age of 34 and most of that number feels they don’t need or want health insurance. So when all is said and done it is estimated that only 8.3 million Americans are too poor to afford health coverage.

So it appears the real problem isn’t getting insurance that is good, the problem is getting good insurance that is affordable. As I said our healthcare system is one of the best in the world and doesn’t need massive restructuring to make it work better. All it needs is a major “tweaking” and rules to make sure the rights of those of us who have policies are protected. If the Democrats would simply open their eyes and ears and look and listen to what the people are saying they would know that too. If they continue on this path of government run health insurance they will all, like lemmings, follow each other off the cliff.

So I guess when you look at it the Democrats really don’t know what they’re talking about.

The figures in this article were obtained from “The Myth of the 46 Million” by Philip Klein

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/20/the-myth-of-the-46-million

© 2010 by Ira Schwartz. Used with permission. All Rights Reserved.

Now More Than Ever

My friend Al Ramirez is running for Senate against Barbara Boxer.  I am supporting Al because I believe that he has the correct ideas to help the nation and stop the partisan politics that are destroying the nation.  I believe in Al because California needs new blood to protect its decaying economy.  I believe in Al because California needs someone to support the environment without destroying industry or agriculture.  I believe in Al because he has the right ideas to get the country and the state back on track.

Please click on the link above to learn a little bit more about the man.

Thank you,

Frank

Generic ballot polls suggest possible epic party disaster for Dems | Washington Examiner#ixzz0e7aLs3mI#ixzz0e7aLs3mI#ixzz0e7aLs3mI

A great one!

Generic ballot polls suggest possible epic party disaster for Dems Washington Examiner#ixzz0e7aLs3mI#ixzz0e7aLs3mI#ixzz0e7aLs3mI

Obama's Stunning Admission - Real Clear Politics – TIME.com

This is quite interesting little note on the health care debate. Read it and let me know what you think.



Obama's Stunning Admission - Real Clear Politics – TIME.com

Don't Tread on Me by Ira Schwartz

It always amazes me how a particular image or phrase can always stir up such strong emotions in people: “Remember the Alamo”; the songs “God Bless America” and “The Star Spangled Banner”; or the images of the Marines hoisting the American flag over Mt. Suribachi and the NYC firefighters raising the flag above the debris of the World Trade Center. Imagery is everything to us humans and often evokes some of the strongest emotional responses.

One image that is as much a part of our history as any of those I mentioned above is a flag with a coiled rattlesnake in the center with this warning boldly printed underneath, “DON’T TREAD ON ME”. That flag become Massachusetts battle cry and eventually all the colonies as the then fledgling United States fought for its freedom against the thundering juggernaut that was the British Empire.

Since the Revolution, that flag has been flown many times as both a symbol of American patriotism and as a symbol of disagreement with the government. It appears it is time to fly it again; in the very state it was first introduced…Massachusetts. It appears a new revolution has started and the first shot was fired by the people when they elected Republican Scott Brown to the Senate. It truly was “a Shot Heard Round the World”.

It appears the results of this single election have caused more aftershocks in the political arena than any other event in recent history. First of all Brown is the first Republican to occupy that seat in 46 years and in one night managed to stop the Democratic juggernaut dead in its tracks. It has panicked the Democrats who are now frantically scrambling about trying to limit the damage wherever they can. WHDH-TV reported that Senate Majority Leader Reid tried to contact the new senator but was unsuccessful. I would have loved to have been a “fly on the wall” in Reid’s office when Browns people refused to put him through.

So what does this all mean right now? First of all this upset win has shaken the Democrats to the very core. So much so it prompted Virginia Democrat Jim Webb to tell Pelosi and Reid he would not go along with trying to ram the Health Care Bill through. Saying, "I believe the most appropriate way to move forward is to have Senate-elect Brown seated before we have any more votes on this issue." You can bet more will follow.

Even the White House has decided to drop back five yards and punt. President Obama, in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, said that he wants the Democratic controlled congress to “coalesce” around parts of insurance reform that Republicans might embrace. He continued, “I would advise that we try and move quickly to coalesce around those elements of the package that the people agree on.” That is the first time any Democrat ever mentioned what the “people” want in reference to healthcare.

Whether Pelosi and Reid like it or not Healthcare will now be placed on hold and will have to be completely reworked if the White House has any hopes of it getting passed. Most feel it won’t see the light of day in 2010. Also the American Clean Air and Security Act (Climate Change Bill) is now in jeopardy as well as the highly controversial Cyber Security Bill. Slowly the Democratic agenda is crumbling before their eyes.

Will the American people firing this salvo across the White House’s bow wake them up? Maybe not but at least this has gotten their attention and made a lot of Democrats very nervous. With the Democratic “magic 60” broken it is going to be much harder for them to get anything done unless they begin bi-partisan negotiations. Republicans need to understand that this is only the beginning with a long, hard road ahead. But it is an opportunity and one that should not be mishandled or allowed to slip away. The American people have spoken in a very loud and simple voice, “Don’t Tread on Me.” It would be advisable for those in public office to listen this time or they could find themselves on the outside looking in come November.

For those of you that forgot you’re high school history a link to the flag is listed below.

http://www.foundingfathers.info/stories/gadsden.html#history

© 2010 by Ira Schwartz. Used with permission. All rights reserved.

The Bizarro World by Craig Covello

Are you familiar with the Superman comic series? No, I don't mean having the ability to recognize the red cape and blue tights. I mean really familiar with the details. Who was Superman's employer? What substance made him weak? OK, admittedly, those are easy, but did you ever hear of the "Bizarro World". This is a cube shaped planet in our solar system where everything is opposite of Earth. Actually, Wikipedia has a somewhat awkward description of Bizarro -

"In the Bizarro world of "Htrae" ("Earth" spelled backwards), society is ruled by the Bizarro Code which states "Us do opposite of all Earthly things! Us hate beauty! Us love ugliness! Is big crime to make anything perfect on Bizarro World!". In one episode, for example, a salesman is doing a brisk trade selling Bizarro bonds: "Guaranteed to lose money for you". Later, the mayor appoints Bizarro No. 1 to investigate a crime, "Because you are stupider than the entire Bizarro police force put together". This is intended and taken as a great compliment."

So you get the idea. In the Bizarro World, everything is opposite. Now what does this have to do with political discourse? Well, I had an opportunity to come in contact with one of the Bizarro World's political writers. His name is David M. Green and he is professor of political science at Hofstra University in New York. Mr. Green recently wrote an editorial blasting Obama from the viewpoint of the political left. So step into the Bizarro World for a few minutes and read it for yourself ....

http://www.counterpunch.org/green12212009.html

Welcome back from the Bizarro World, which appears to be the model for higher education. The editorial you just read was written by a political science college professor. A guy who has decided to devote his life to teaching our kids. A guy who considers himself learned. Someone who should have the ability to write somewhat objectively in the marketplace of ideas. Instead, we have a professor who uses the following terms to describe Obama -

"the little prick"

"clown "

"fool"

"skinny little geek"

No, these phrases were not written on the wall of the 3rd grade boys bathroom. They were published by a web site called Counterpunch which describes itself as "America's Best Political Newsletter". Bizarro indeed.

To be fair, Green believes Obama should be much more concerned with creating jobs than reinventing health care insurance. I agree with him. But I disagree with most of his other assessments, including his views regarding the Republican Party.

"You know, elite Republicans may be sociopaths, and they may be lower on the moral totem pole than your basic cannibal, but they’re not stupid."

To be clear, I am not a fan of the Republican party of late, but I don't consider the party sociopathic. This is ridiculous hyperbole more suited to professional wrestling interviews than to commentary on "America's Best Political Newsletter" . Enough was enough. I decided to engage Mr. Green directly by sending the following email.

Craig Covello to David.M.Green

Dec 29, 2009

David:

We have never met, but I just read your editorial about Obama that is making its way through Face Book. Based upon your writing, we do have one thing in common. Neither of us likes our current president very much, but for very different reasons. I am a conservative, so when I write about what troubles me with the current administration, my thoughts usually revolve around recent events, policies, statements and facts. Your editorial seems to ramble and rant against personalities while projecting a good deal of anger. I am not sure what you stand for, but I can tell you that your anger and use of explicit language does not speak well for your as an educator. I am glad my boys go to UCLA and the University of North Texas instead of Hofstra.

Craig Covello

Folsom CA

And here was the response....

David Green to Craig Covello

Dec 29, 2009

…I’m glad they did, too Craig. At least, if they’re as wont to make bogus assumptions as their dad.

What on earth ever gave you the idea that I run my classroom as editorial polemics sessions, complete with foul language? One thing I despise about you right-wingers is the ad hominem remarks. The other thing is the robotic repetition. I could practically write your email for you - you guys always say the same crap. Meanwhile, yeah, I’m angry. I’m angry about how regressives wrecked the country, and I’m angry that Obama is not fixing it. As the tag line of my website says, "If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention". With all due respect, you seem to fall into both categories all too neatly.

Cheers

dg

So it appears that Mr.Green has as much contempt for me as he does for Obama. Some of this anger may have been self-inflected, since my email was a little provocative. I admit to using charged words such as "ramble" and "rant". Mr. Green's response, however, did not really address the issues I called him on. What does he stand for? What are the real solutions in his opinion? No, his response was more of the same. Ridicule and cynicism. And Green's assertion that he is politically objective and free of foul language in his college classroom is a little hard to swallow -

"What on earth ever gave you the idea that I run my classroom as editorial polemics sessions, complete with foul language?"

Perhaps I got the idea FROM HIS ARTICLE". I guess in the Bizarro World, a liberal and caustic professor can change his personality by simply passing through a door. He can publish scathing personal attacks on others, use sophomoric language to humiliate and denigrate large groups of people, yet become an objective and considerate educator of young minds after entering the hallowed halls of Bizarro University. Green may have an advanced college degree, but for all his education, he seems to have trouble understanding Obama. To quote Green's own article

"This guy is killing me, though at the same time I still can’t quite figure him out."

Hey David, put down the diploma for a few minutes and try googling "A Hollywood Republican" or " Craig's Notes on the Obama White House Diaries" or better yet, the US Constitution in order to get a different perspective. Then maybe you can understand Obama's game plan. And thanks again for shaping the minds of America's youth with phrases like "the little prick".

Copyright 2009 by Craig Covello. Used with permission. All rights reserved

America Rising by Ira Schwartz

"We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."

Ben Franklin 1776

Welcome to 2010 everyone, the year of the second American Revolution. This will be the year “we the people” take our country back. Sounds good doesn’t it. Sounding “good” is one thing, making it happen is another?

The unhappiness in this country is on the rise; the slow rate of recovery of the economy; record setting unemployment; the expanding debt; healthcare issues; two wars and the list goes on. The people’s patience has reached an end and the government continues on as if nothing is happening. A “clean Sweep” in November is what most Americans are talking about. That’s all well and good but who are we going to replace them with and what will their values be?

The loudest voices are those of a conservative nature. They want to bring America back from the abyss of corruption and moral depravity and back into the arms of conservative moral values. But what exactly are those conservative moral values? We need to know this before we can proceed.

Most of the conservatives I’ve talked to are not shy about what they believe in. To list them all would take too long so a link to Conservative vs. Liberal values can be found at the end of this article. Most of those issues have been “hot topics” for quite some time and a large section of this country does not subscribe to all of those beliefs. Americans are indeed angry but they are also NOT stupid. We are not prepared to put people in office who do not represent ALL Americans just to remove those that are presently in power. We already made that mistake once.

For this “Second Revolution” to work, all Americans must be heard and all our concerns MUST be taken into consideration. If the conservative section refuses to budge then they will be forced to go it alone and they will fail and they will be blamed for allowing the present administration to continue. The burden will be theirs alone.

So what’s the answer? The answer is what this country is all about. The answer is what we call ourselves…The UNITED States of America. We need to stop the political rhetoric and start searching for those candidates that will help this country move forward. Not on a conservative agenda or a liberal agenda or a Republican agenda or Democratic agenda but on as I said in my first article 7 months ago a true bi-partisan American agenda. We need to carefully scrutinize all the candidates and make sure they will really be working for “The People” not their own political parties.

The power is in our hands and we need to wield it wisely for we may never get a second chance. This country is at the crossroads and what we do in the next 10 months will decide its fate for decades to come. There will be no do over’s so we need to do it “together” and we need to do it right. Not for Republicans; not for Democrats but for all AMERICANS.

Quote from “An American President” 1996-written by Aaron Sorkin-Michael Douglas as President Andrew Shepherd.

“America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free".

http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

©2010 by Ira Schwartz. Used by Permission. All rights reserved.

What A Difference a Year Makes

It is pretty much the end of 2009. It is also the end of the first decade of the Millennium. Hard to believe that we’ve gone through ten years since the Y2K scare. Also, hard to believe we had three different presidents since the turn of the Millennium: One that was impeached, one that retired extremely unpopular and one that is becoming extremely unpopular.

Barak Hussein Obama has been president for 11 months. So, this year is his for all its good and bad. There is no doubt about that. When he became President, the entire world was energized. America had elected a new savior. He was young, energetic and promised hope and change. And, he is the first African American President in US history. All of the scars of the past had disappeared. Per the Progressives, we had become a true shining city on the hill. The Republican Party was in deep trouble.

Now, that we have had him as President for one year, nothing has changed and the hope is dimming by the minute. His first year in office has been notable for basically one thing: he has accomplished nothing. Gitmo is still operating. Health Care Reform may or may not happen. Cap and Trade is effectively dead (especially in light of Climategate). The Recession is still destroying the lives of millions of Americans. And, based upon yesterday’s latest report, here comes the inflation we have all been dreading. The President, for all intents and purposes, has been a failure.

Obama’s approval rating is at the lowest ever for a President in office for one year. That is a bad thing for the country, but a good thing for the Republican Party. When you factor in the approval rating of Congress or should I say its 68% percent disapproval rating; the universal dislike of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Chris Dodd; and, the insistence on passing a health care bill even though almost 70% of the country do not want it, things do not look too rosy for the Democratic Party in 2010.

In the past few days, it has become evident that Democratic Congressmen see the writing on the wall. They are beginning to announce their retirements. As of my last count, four have decided not to seek reelection. The most recent being a long term Congressman from Tennessee.

Will 2010 be a repeat of 1994? Or, will it be even worse for the Democratic Party than 1994? Who knows? I can just say for the record I would not want to be running for reelection as a member of any party right now; especially the Democrats.

The Tea Party movement which has been largely ignored by the main stream media and scoffed at by the Democratic leadership is currently polling higher than the mainstream Republican Party. On its face, this would appear to be bad for the Republicans. But, it may actually be good because the Tea Party movement is, for the most part, all Republican. So, unless they form their own party, these people will be voting Republican in November. Of course, if they do form their own party, as I have said in the past, it will represent the end of the conservative movement as we know it. The Democrats will have control for years to come.

A few days ago, I firmly believed that Congress would pass some sort of health care reform within the next 60 days. However, yesterday’s events may have made it less likely. Just when Harry Reid seemed to have reached a compromise to get his filibuster proof 60 votes, his own party began to splinter. Ex DNC Chairman Howard Dean went on the record as saying that the entire Senate Bill should be scratched because it has become spineless. Per Mr. Dean, without a public option there is nothing to discuss. If Dean is successful, whatever Reid was accomplishing in the Senate will dissipate quickly. Only then, will Health Care Reform have to become bipartisan for anything to happen. Abortion, Tort Reform and the Free Market for Health Insurance will have to be addressed. If Harry Reid and the President are smart about this, they may be able to pass Health Care Reform with Republican support, albeit the left wing of the Democratic Party will be left in the dust! Good riddance to them I say.

On another front, just this morning, Iran launched another test missile. In the past year, President Obama has done nothing to stop Iran’s nuclear program. Will the events of the past 24 hours change his attitude? Or, must the world rely completely on Israel to stop this threat? It seems that this is going to be the case. Facing extreme opposition from the left wing of his party, President Obama is not going to confront Iran in any way that will scare its leadership into submission. Our only hope is that Obama does not try to stop Israel from doing what is necessary.

By the way, I was at a dinner last week in which a very prevalent Congressman was speaking. Congressman Mark Kirk from Illinois, a member of the House Armed Services Committee and the current Republican hopeful to take President Obama’s Illinois Senate seat, stated that one of the biggest blunders made by President Obama in foreign affairs was the removal of the missile shield from Poland. Appeasing the Russians here was a tragic strategic error. Kirk made it clear that the missile defense system in question was not just to protect NATO countries. Apparently Poland is a direct line between Iran and the United States. That missile defense system would be protecting the United States from an Iranian missile attack.

I could go on forever, but this is enough for one of my last columns of 2009. In concluding, this has not been a very good year for the country, its President and its Congress. However, I do not hear anyone saying right now that the Republican Party is dead and should be buried. In fact, all I hear is that the Republican Party is going to possibly take back Congress in 2010. Of course, if the economy turns around in the next nine months, 2010 could turn into a good year for Democrats again!

© 2009 by Frank T. DeMartini. Permission to copy will be granted freely upon request.

Lucky Ties

Chris Christie was obviously wearing his; as was Robert McDonnell. The GOP is officially breathing again. It was a great day for Republicans yesterday. It happened exactly one year after we took our worst shellacking since the 1960’s. And, what did President Obama do while his party was getting whooped in two states which voted for him last year? He sat at home and watched a special on HBO about His election victory last year. The official statement from the White House is that he did not even bother to watch any of the results as “they just didn’t matter and didn’t reflect on him: They were locally driven.”

For the past year I have been saying the current President is one of the biggest megalomaniacs in history. And, last night, he just proved it again. While the state of New Jersey which is one of the bluest was falling and the State of Virginia was being swept by Republicans which has not happened since Reconstruction, the President was watching a TV show about His grandiose victory last year. His ego is completely out of control. I wonder if he was wearing his lucky tie last night.

However, we all know who definitely was not: Doug Hoffman. This is the man that ran on the Conservative ticket in NY-23 which is a district in Upstate New York that has been Republican since the Civil War. Well, in the immortal words of Jacques Clousseau, “Not Anymore!” Doug Hoffman was defeated yesterday garnering only 46% of the vote. The projected winner, the Democrat Bill Owens, garnered 49% and the liberal Republican who withdrew last week received 5%. She proved to be he spoiler.

I find this race in NY-23 to be very disturbing. It is a race that garnered national attention when Sarah Palin, the Queen of the Far Right, decided to support the Conservative Candidate and not the Republican. Before that, the race was hardly being looked at by anybody.

NY-23 is a district in Upstate New York which borders on Canada and Vermont. It is more than 90% white and skews Republican by a margin of more than five percentage points. The area has been Republican for as far as anyone can remember. But, last night, it elected a Democrat. Why?

The Republican Party nominated Dede Scozzafava to run in this district without a primary. Ms. Scozzafava is one of the most liberal Republicans in the history of the Party. She is not pro-life, supports same-sex marriage and has strong ties to Labor, positions which are opposed by the majority of the Party. She does support the Bush tax cuts and is against Cap-And-Trade. It was rumored during the election that she hinted she might caucus with the Democrats if elected.

Obviously the nomination of Ms. Scozzafava was a big mistake. By nominating her, the Party allowed a three way race to occur thereby guaranteeing a Democratic victory. Of course, it did not help, that upon quitting the race five days ago, Ms. Scozzafava gave her support, not to the Conservative Hoffman, but to the Democrat Owens. The Party should have run a primary before nominating Scozzafava or, at the least, seen the power of the Right movement and nominated someone more in line with the mainstream Republican platform.

But, that is not really what disturbs me about the race in NY-23. What disturbs me the most is the ramification of what happened there to the rest of the country and to the elections in 2010. The Republican Party seems to be splintering into two halves, the conservatives and the moderates. The Conservatives are being supported by Ms. Palin and a large group of Right Wing pundits. They are represented by the Tea Party Organizations and the States’ Rights Groups. I am probably one of them.

However, without the moderates; the center of the political spectrum, the Party will not regain control of the federal government. There is simply not enough of the Far Right to support a majority anywhere in the country. The moderates and independents win elections. And, boy was that clear last night.

All of the exit polling shows that McDonnell and Christie won because there was a major swing in the independent voter to the Republicans. These swing voters stated they were against the huge government spending, the failed stimulus package and were in fear for the future of their children. The majority of these independents voted for Obama in the last election.

We need them these independents. We must do whatever is necessary to maintain their support. We cannot swing to the far right and expect to do anything in 2010. If we do, there will be a lot of Democrats that will be wearing their lucky ties. If we continue to attract the moderates and independents as happened yesterday, it will be a large group of Republicans wearing theirs.

©2009 by Frank T. DeMartini

Picasso by Craig Covello

In our attempt to get different perspectives and opinions on the various issues at hand today, occasionally we will publish articles from guest writers. Attached hereto is an article by Craig Covello who is a Republican from Northern California that we felt was worth reading.

Picasso

We are an American family. All 300+ million of us. But something has happened, something profound and disturbing. It is 3AM and I can't sleep thinking about the political events of the past year, past month and even the past week. The President's goal of "radically transforming the United States of America", whether successful or not, comes at a price. The relatively impersonal news and commentary emanating from Washington has become a catalyst which is redefining some very personal relationships in my own life. There have been some casualties. One of my closest friends in the world is no longer my closest friend. Our views have drifted that far apart. My mother-in-law of over 30 years is now a fan of Obama. This is someone who hung a poster of Ronald Reagan in her laundry room back in the 80's. We have much less in common today. She sees the trend of government socialism as beneficial to her grandsons. I see it as a very real threat to the future and freedom of my 2 boys. So what happened? How can family and friends come to such polarized conclusions regarding the direction of this country when they share a relatively common experience?

I can only offer one possible explanation. Picasso. Have you ever looked at a Picasso painting? Really looked at it? Abstract art is difficult to interpret in the context of reality. In the absence of a clear, discernible picture, the mind will strive to make sense of the image based upon personal bias, experience and even mood. For example, consider the painting entitled "Sylvette" . This painting is described as "a 19-year-old woman in bright colours and semi-abstract, geometric forms" I see a police officer sitting at a poker table with someone peering over his shoulder. Crazy, right? But I think we see what we want to see. So it comes as no surprise that when Washington politics becomes increasingly obfuscated and at times contradictory, the harder we try to make sense of it all. The net result-widely different interpretations of the same news.

So what is the answer? In my humble opinion, pitch the Picasso and get a photo representing something we can see clearly.

1. We need to restore some trust in government by letting things settle down. The rules we grew up with are changing at an exponential rate and it is time to stop, take a breath and reassess. I like our great nation, even with some of it's faults. There will be no utopia in America because we as humans are imperfect. It is ridiculous to start over by "radically transforming the United States of America" in an attempt to solve some of our problems. Let's take them on one step at a time. And let's be on guard to watch for anyone, regardless of party, who tries to implement change at a furious pace. Would you buy a car if the deal offered was only good for 5 minutes? The sense of urgency regarding domestic issues is artificial. It is manipulative, divisive and it needs to stop.

2. I say many in Congress have worn out their welcome on both sides of the isle. We need to thoroughly reexamine those running for reelection in 2010. We need to take voting seriously by doing our homework. Are they ineffective or unethical? Do they act contrary to their rhetoric? What is their specific voting record? Do you agree with most of their votes? If not, replace them. The term "Till death do you part" does not apply here. We need to ignore spin, marketing, hype, misdirection and castigation. Stick with the facts of the candidate. The media has done this country an incredible disservice by becoming extensions of partisan public relation offices.

3. Finally, we need to decide who we are and who we want to be, both individually and as a free nation. Do we really need our lives fulfilled on the promises of some public figure who we don't personally know? Most campaigns promise to "give us something" in exchange for our vote. Those promises don't often materialize. However, some of the quid pro quo which is actually delivered often comes at the high cost of personal freedom. Ironically, there are those who could not wait to move away from Mom and Dad when they turned 18, but now have no problem being excessively regulated and restricted by a centralized government when it comes to their own life. The quote from General John Stark on July 31, 1809 got it right. (Go ahead and look it up on Google. It is time for some homework. While you are at it, look up Picasso's Sylvette as well.)

Well, it is now 4AM, but I feel better having written this.

“Die Quickly”

Representative Joe Wilson shouts in the House Chamber to President Obama during a speech on Health Care Reform, “You Lie,” and is forced to apologize to the President directly and compelled to apologize in the House where the incident occurred. He chooses only to apologize to the President. This did not make him many friends in the Democratic Caucus. They could not bully him into a formal apology in the Chamber. What happens next, the Democratic House votes to rebuke him in a meaningless resolution. Of course, the vote is along party lines.

A few weeks later, Representative Alay Grayson of Florida, who also happens to be a Democrat, says while debating Health Care Reform on the House Floor:

"If you get sick, America, the Republican health care plan is this: Die quickly. That's right. The Republicans want you to die quickly if you get sick."

And, what happens to Grayson: Nothing! The Democratic Congress does nothing. Speaker Pelosi says she will not force him to apologize or withdraw his statement. A resolution along the lines of the one rebuking Wilson is introduced in the House by the Republicans and fails. This is just another example of the Democratic double standard that exists in Congress.

But, the deeper question is this: has the debate over health care gotten to the point where the Democrats say that Republicans want Americans to die and Sarah Palin throws remarks out like “Death Squads.” Has it all come down to fear mongering and hatred on both sides? What happened to the intellectual form of debate, not only in Congress, but in the media as well?

A few weeks ago, I wrote an article for this column entitled, “Why We Can’t Sign onto the Democrats Health Care Reform?” In that article I attempted to give a carefully thought out argument relating to Conservative issues in the current Democratic proposal. I am not in Congress. Why can’t our elected leaders do the same? Why must they resort to fear and hatred? Is it because they have no faith in the American public to understand policy decisions? If that is the case, they are deadly wrong. We do understand and that is why President Obama and the Democratic Congress cannot get HR 3200 passed in its current form despite their overwhelming majority.

Senator Baucus of Montana, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee is fighting to get his proposed bill through the Committee. The bill has been in the mark-up phase for about two weeks. Numerous amendments have been added to it such that it has been reported to be now over 1,000 pages long. Here they go again.

And, now, Congress is debating whether this bill or HR 3200 will be available online for 72 hours before any vote on them. Why are they even debating this? Wasn’t that one of President Obama’s main campaign promises? Did he not promise more transparency in government? Didn’t he want to stimulate fair and open debate?

The very liberal Saturday Night Live ran a skit last week in which President Obama was parodied. The main point of the skit was not that the President is too liberal, but that the left should be just as mad as the right because after nine months in office, the President has done absolutely nothing. You can find the skit at: http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/clips/obama-address/1163263/. And, one of those nothings is more transparency.

Both the Congress and the President do not want America to see either proposal before they are passed. They do not want any more debate. They know that if intellectual debate continues, the current form of Health Care Reform will fail. At first Senator Baucus’ bill looked like it would work. It was just a bad enough proposal to get both sides a little angry. It smelled like an old fashioned form of bipartisan compromise.

However, to the dismay of the Democratic Leadership, it did not contain the required public option. The Democrats from the far left have sworn that a bill without the public option will not happen. The Republicans will not vote for any bill with a public option. The middle of the road Democrats, the Blue Dogs, are the key. So, maybe the plan is to just sneak the public option in at the last minute, create a sense of urgency and convince the Blue Dogs to vote for it. This is not transparency. This amounts to lies and deceit. Hey, maybe Wilson was right?

I have another question regarding this issue. Why will this miraculous form of Health Care Reform that is being proposed by the Democratic Leadership not take effect until 2013? Maybe, because the President and Congress both know what a disaster it will truly be and they want the President safely into his second term before the disaster strikes. Again, this seems deceitful. Hey, maybe Wilson was right?

President Obama says he wants the bill to be revenue neutral and will sign it in no other form. Yet, neither the President nor Congress has any plan on how to pay for it and keep it that way. Other than higher taxes that is. Oh, I’m sorry; the President and Congress are not calling them taxes. Remember, Obama promised that no one making less than $250,000 per year would have higher taxes. So, how is this bill being paid for: penalties. Sounds to me like taxes, after all if it smells like a duck . . . Again, maybe Wilson was right?

But, I digress. The point of this article is supposed to be about civilized debate. That is what we need. We need Health Care Reform. We all agree on that. Maybe Congress should stop trying to bite off more than it can chew and debate the real issues on Health Care Reform. Only, after real civilized debate will we be able to come up with a plan that actually works and makes both sides a little mad and both sides a little happy.

As I have stated before, the Republicans want the following issues addressed and debated. If the President wants this bill to be bipartisan and wants some Republican support, we need the following to be debated:

1. Coverage for Pre-existing Conditions;
2. Tort Reform;
3. Insurance availability across state borders;
4. No coverage for illegal aliens;
5. No coverage for elective abortions; and,
6. A means to pay for it that makes sense across the board and that will somewhat revenue neutral. (Anyone that thinks this is not going to cost some money is dreaming).

The Republican Party does not and has not ever wanted people to “die quickly.” It does not want people to die at all. But, it does want a carefully thought out plan that protects the people, the sovereignty of the states, and is fiscally sound. Representative Alan Grayson is definitely wrong and should apologize to the American people for his outlandish and hate filled statement.

© 2009 by Frank T. DeMartini. Permission to copy will be freely granted upon request.

Is Obama the Next Wilson?

Just this morning, I was watching President Obama’s speech before the United Nations. I must admit it was given with eloquence and was quite moving. However, for the most part it was rhetoric and the dreams of an idealistic man in Fantasyland. I do not want to really beat a dead horse, but as stated in my last article about the ideology of liberals, President Obama’s foreign policy completely ignores reality. It is almost delusional. Obama dreams about everything being utopian, but ignores the writings on the wall. And, in the process he insults our trusted ally Israel by demanding it stop building settlements without requiring the Palestinians to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist.

The speech was also very Wilsonian. I could imagine the words of Woodrow Wilson pitching the League of Nations to the United States Congress after the end of World War One. The League of Nations . . .

“is a definite guaranty of peace. It is a definite guaranty by word against aggression. It is a definite guaranty against the things which have just come near bringing the whole structure of civilization into ruin. Its purposes do not for a moment lie vague. Its purposes are declared, and its powers are unmistakable. It is not in contemplation that this should be merely a league to secure the peace of the world. It is a league which can be used for cooperation in any international matter.”

In fact, parts of President Obama’s speech today mirrored these themes exactly.

The American Congress did not buy the sales job of Wilson and did not ratify the Versailles Treaty. America was not a member of the League of Nations. The League of Nations failed and the bloodiest war in the history of mankind resulted. As a result, for the most part, history looks at Woodrow Wilson’s presidency as a failure.

Wilson was an idealist and President Obama is an idealist. In fact, the two men have quite a lot in common. They are both of the extreme left and considered Progressives. And, there is much more.

Woodrow Wilson and Back Obama were both educated in elite Northeastern Ivy League Schools. Wilson was a graduate of Princeton; Obama a graduate of Harvard. They were both lawyers who did not practice for an extended period of time. And, most importantly, both became President with very little governmental experience. Wilson was in the midst of his first term as governor of New Jersey. Barack Obama was in the middle of his first term as a Senator from Illinois. And, both became President because of circumstances beyond their control: Wilson because of a split in the Republican Party during a three man election and Obama because of the crash of the economic system six weeks before the election.

In addition to their idealistic viewpoints on foreign affairs, both were staunch supporters of the Federal Reserve. Wilson, in fact, was President during its creation and managed to slip it through a Congress that mostly opposed it. Obama is increasing the powers of the Fed on an almost daily basis. There are many that feel the Fed is part of an idealistic world view. (See e.g., The Secret of Jekyll Island). This is the same idealistic world view that is a cornerstone of President Obama and Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy. It is also, unfortunately, socialist. The underlying theme of both is that the creation of a World Bank will make every country and every person equal.

Many of the initial supporters of the Fed and its progeny of paper money believe that the rich countries should support the rest of the world and put all nations on an even playing field. In fact, it can be argued that this was the main argument of President Obama’s speech before the General Assembly today. It is idealistically based socialism pure and simple. Unfortunately, Margaret Thatcher said it best. “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” And, that may be what is happening right now. The Fed cannot print its paper money fast enough. The realism is beginning to set in.

Will America continue to buy into Obama’s rhetoric? Maybe. Will Obama be considered a failure in the same vein as Woodrow Wilson? I hope not, but if things continue as they are, it is beginning to look more likely each and every day.

On other fronts - In my opinion President Obama made a major error last week when he agreed to withdraw the missile defense system from Poland and the Czech Republic. This is kowtowing to the Russians pure and simple. The governments of both Eastern European countries feel the President has sold out our NATO allies. Do I need to remind my readers that these two countries were once within the tyrannical control of the USSR? They are both now members of NATO. We have promised them defense. What has the President done to end their fears of another Russian takeover? Nothing. In fact, the President gives in to Russia at the expense of our Eastern European allies.

Yesterday I became aware of an Executive Order signed by President Obama on January 27 of this year. It is Executive Order Number 2009-15 and is published in the Federal Register. I simply do not understand why this was not picked up by the mainstream or any media for that matter. The order is very simple. It allocates 20.3 million dollars of our taxpayers’ money to aid refuges of the Gaza Strip. Isn’t this where the Hamas controls? Aren’t these refuges that our taxpayer money is being used for going to be enemies of Israel? Isn’t Israel one of our most important allies? I know it was before the current administration.

Developing news on the health care front is that Harry Reid is going to use reconciliation in the Senate if he cannot get the sixty members necessary to block a filibuster. In other words, he is going to bend the rules to his favor so that a simple majority can bypass Senate rules.

Sounds a lot like what is going on in Massachusetts right now. When John Kerry was running for President and Mitt Romney was the governor, the Democratic Legislature immediately took the power out of Romney’s hands to appoint a Senator had Kerry won. I mean, God forbid that the Republican Romney would appoint a Republican to the Senate representing Massachusetts. Now, that Ted Kennedy has passed away, the situation is reversed. The Massachusetts Legislature is changing the rules again to give the Democratic Governor the power to appoint a successor to fulfill Kennedy’s term. The Democrats do not want to risk a special election in which a Republican might win. This is typical Democratic liberal behavior. The rules are only as good as long as they benefit their ideals.

Lastly, the State of California’s unemployment rate has reached a 70 year high. What can we do about it? The state is in a mess and our Democratic Legislature and Republican Governor cannot even begin to come up with a solution. The budget deficit is out of control. Storefronts are empty everywhere you look. Foreclosure rates are at an all time high. And, real estate is in a free fall. Maybe, the time is right to kick them all out of office. Couple that with our Democratic Congress that has got to go; and, maybe government will start being for the people and not for itself. Isn’t that what the American form of Democracy is supposed to be all about?

©2009 by Frank T. DeMartini. Permission to copy will be granted freely upon request.

Say "No" To Obama by Yari Shamir

Here is the correct web site for the article I tried to post yesterday. I accidentally posted an article from the New York Times about the unemployment rate in California. It is from YNet News.

http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3778526,00.html

Why Can’t Conservative Sign onto the Democrat’s Plan?

It is now the dog days of summer and Congress is about to go back to work. The Groundsell by the Democrats during the month of August was a complete failure. President Obama’s approval numbers are on a steady downward slide. And yet, the Democrats insist on passing this Obamanation that is more commonly known as HR 3200.

The President has just announced that he will try a more formal sell to Congress on September 9. Will this work more than the last press conference in which he appeared to have no idea what he was trying to sell? Will it be more successful than his appeal to religious leaders last week? Or, will this be the final death knell in the partisan attempt at Health Care Reform? Only time will tell.

However, the tide has definitely turned against the Democrats. More than 50% of the country on the whole and in some parts of the electorate, way more than 50% are against the current bill and its companion bills both in the House and Senate. Why? Because, Republicans and even moderate Democrats cannot stomach what is contained in them.

My last article was about the need for bipartisanship and debate in Congress. I still feel that way but I do not see it happening. In fact, both sides are digging their heals into the sand and getting ready for the tug of war. At this point, it is not about whose solution is better; it seems to be about which side will win.

HR 3200 and its progeny are disasters. It seems that everyone except the far left agrees on this. I will not get into the death panel issue as it was carefully analyzed by my friend Ira in an earlier column, but I will get into certain other issues that I feel are wrong with the bills and why almost the entire populace is rallying against them.

To begin with, the public option has to go. All moderates and conservatives agree. It is bad public policy and it is bad for America. The minute you put the public option into play, all private insurance companies will be driven out of business and we will have socialized health care which is the goal of the far left anyway. Once we have socialized health care, the parade of horribles begins. This includes rationing of health care, lack of choice and skyrocketing taxes.

However, if you regulate the current insurance industry, you will promote competition in the private sector and drive down prices. This is the whole theory behind the anti-trust laws in the United States. (By the way, regulation, however bad it is for the free market is better than the alternative). The more competitive the private sector becomes, the lower the cost of health insurance will be. Further, if you compel the entire population to become insured either through better tax credits for individuals and/or employers, regular market forces will naturally drive down the cost of insurance.

Secondly, abortion must be specifically excluded from any proposed legislation. The general public must not be forced to fund an elective procedure. Say what you will about your stance on abortion, but it is an elective procedure unless the health of the mother is in jeopardy. Then, it is a medical necessity and it is a whole different ball game.

President Obama, during his appeal to the religious community last week, contacted Catholic Bishops and Leaders. He impressed upon them the need for Health Care Reform. They unilaterally rejected his pleas. Why? Because, of the abortion issue. The entire Catholic community believes that health care for everyone is a basic human right. However, until the abortion issue is addressed, neither the Catholic Church, nor any other conservative religious organization is going to lobby their followers for Obamacare.

Just as an aside, Obama is beginning to show how much of an old fashioned politician he really is. He ran on the basis of change. During the campaign, he argued that America is no longer a Christian nation and that people cling to their religion when they are unhappy about their lives. Now, that he needs religion to help his cause, he goes running to religion. This is not change. He is a hypocrite!

The next issue is very controversial and, unfortunately, it is also a monetary one. Public money in any way, shape or form, must not be used to fund medical care for illegal immigrants. I know people from the far left are going to call me a racist and a heartless bastard. Believe me, I am not. But, if we are going to bankrupt this country with this level of major health care reform, it should only be for legal, taxpaying citizens and those holding valid visas.

I am not saying that someone lying on the street bleeding to death should not receive emergency treatment because they are illegally here. The law already states that everyone with a true emergency must be treated. All I am saying is that basic health care that is not a true emergency should not be afforded to illegal aliens. They are many people in this country that have come here properly. They should be entitled to the benefits of citizens. The rest should not.

Fourth, a plan must be developed that is revenue neutral. We cannot mortgage our children’s future any longer. If no one can come up with a way to pay for this plan without destroying the economy in the process, then there should be no plan at all. Some of the top minds in this country are in Washington right now trying to put a plan together. Let them find a way to fund it without it increasing the debt by over one trillion dollars in the next ten years.

Lastly, there should be no tax penalty for employers who do not want to provide health insurance and individuals who do not want to be insured. If a company provides health insurance, there should be tax benefits for providing it. There should be no penalty for not doing so. If an individual does not want insurance, that is a personal choice. There are many people under 30 who simply do not want to be covered. Likewise, there are many rich people that would rather be self insured and pay the medical bills themselves.

I keep hearing from many sources that the Republicans have no solutions and are just trying to kill health reform to put Obama to shame. That is not true. There are many Republican points on health care that are frankly, just being ignored by the Democrats. Among them are Tort Reform to lower medical malpractice premiums and bring medical costs down; and better tax benefits for health insurance at both the employer and individual level.

Let the Democratic Congress deal with the issues set forth herein and a bipartisan bill will be enacted. If they do not and decide to continue going it alone, the effects of that will be felt by them in 2010. Of course, that might not be all that bad. The Republicans will get control of the House and Senate again!

© 2009 by Frank T. DeMartini. Permission to copy will be granted freely upon request.

The Measure of a Man by Ira Schwartz

“Doctor Death”, death panels, euthanasia of our seniors. Those 10 second sound bites have filled the media since the bomb that is HR 3200 was dropped. But let’s step back, back to how all of this started, back to ground zero, back to July 24th. On that day “The New York Post” printed an article by Betsy McCaughey titled “Deadly Doctors”. In this article McCaughey surgically slices and dices Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the president’s new Health Care advisor, on his published writings regarding patient care. I have listed a link to the article below so I won’t go into it too deeply. However I will say McCaughey paints Dr. Emanuel as the devil incarnate. Her only proof of this second coming of evil are the numerous quotes from and references to a number of Dr. Emanuel’s works. At least she properly listed her sources saving me hours of searching the internet for the material. After reviewing her references I discovered every single quote she used was grossly taken out of context. It was also painfully obvious Ms. McCaughey had never read any of Dr. Emanuel’s academic papers, especially the ones she quoted from. If she had she would have read Dr. Emanuel clearly stating in several of these papers, “I am not advocating this.” Can we say, “Yellow Journalism?” But this train wreck doesn’t stop here. Oh no, like a bad dream it gets worse.

On the floor of the House of Representatives Republican Michele Bachmann blatantly used the McCaughey article as gospel in her attack against the white house’s appointment of Dr. Emanuel to his new post. From her speech, which is available on “YouTube”, it is obvious that Bachmann, like McCaughey, failed to do her homework. But this gets better.

The ex republican vice presidential candidate and ex governor of Alaska (A lot of ex’s there don’t ya think) the “late but at least I arrived at the party”, Sarah Palin got her two cents in. And like all the rest before her, she boldly marched into the fray armed only with the facts as told by McCaughey. And I quote from her speech:

“Rep. Michele Bachmann highlighted the Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff, in a floor speech to the House of Representatives. I commend her for being a voice for the most precious members of our society, our children and our seniors.

Of course, it’s not just this one provision that presents a problem. My original comments concerned statements made by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor to President Obama and the brother of the President’s chief of staff. Dr. Emanuel has written that some medical services should not be guaranteed to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens....An obvious example are not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.” Dr. Emanuel has also advocated basing medical decisions on a system which “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.”

Actually Palin’s partial quote was from an article written by Dr. Emanuel for the “The Lancet”. He was discussing the merits of “The Complete Life System”. A system he did not create. The exact quote is:

“When implemented, The complete Life system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.”

It’s a little different once the quote is read in context isn’t it.

So who is Dr. Ezekiel J. Emanuel? Dr. Emanuel is an M.D. as well as holding a Ph.D.; Wikipedia lists him as an American NIH bioethicist (the study of ethical controversies brought about by advances in biology and medicine) and a fellow at the nonprofit bioethics research institute “The Hastings Center”. He is a leading opponent of euthanasia laws, sometimes called state-assisted suicide, and a proponent of a Guaranteed Healthcare Access Plan. He held the position of associate professor at Harvard Medical School in 1997 and now holds the position of Director of the Clinical Bioethics Department at the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Dr. Emanuel is also the brother of Rahm Emanuel, the current White House Chief of Staff.

So what are we left with? No death panels, no Doctor Death no euthanasia’s only misquotes and misrepresentation and a compulsion of stating opinions and suppositions as facts.

Martin Luther King said, “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.”

Betsy McCaughey was nationally embarrassed by John Stewart on “The Daily Show” when she tried to defend her article. She later resigned from her position on the Cantel Medical board never apologizing for her misrepresentation of the facts. Republican Michele Bachmann remains silent on the issue as does “The New York Post”. Sarah Palin continues on her merry way, blindly rolling along telling everyone she said nothing wrong…again. Meanwhile every reputable medical journal, medical organization, newspaper (no not “The Post”) and magazine has come to the defense of Dr. Emanuel, the only person who seems to have stepped up to the plate. When asked about the rumors surrounding him Dr. Emanuel simply replied, “This is certainly untrue and a distortion of my record.” No biting retort, no complaints, no political rhetoric, not even a mention that his own sister suffers from Cerebral Palsy. He adds later, "We (the Emanuels) are pretty thick-skinned. I am not going to change my colors. I am not going to crawl under a rock."

If he did he would have to share it with the likes of Betsy McCaughey and Michele Bachmann.

After watching the widespread anger currently being aimed at the Democratic Party I would have expected better from the GOP. They need to understand that this tidal wave of dissent can as easily sweep Republicans away as Democrats. With Speaker Pelosi screaming at the top of her lungs how all those not in favor of Healthcare Reform are un-American the people need to see one party take the high road. The party that can achieve this will be the party the people follow.

Speaking of taking the high road I would like to add one final note. On July 25th at a Town Hall meeting in Sun City, Arizona Senator John McCain again showed the country and the world what a true American he really is. Below is a section taken from an article by Paul Lester published on “Deadline USA”.

“During the meeting in the retirement community of Sun City, Arizona, Obama's former rival defended the president after an attendee asked: "Doesn't he [Obama] know that we still live under a constitution?"

"I'm sure that he does," McCain said. After the crowd erupted into laughter, the Arizona senator said: "No, no. I am serious. I am sure that he does and I'm sure he respects the constitution."

"No!" the attendees shouted. McCain responded: "I am absolutely convinced of it. I just believe, my friends, that there is a fundamental difference in philosophy and about the role of government. That is why we have competition for public office and competition amongst parties, and competition about different ideas and vision for the future of America. I'm convinced the president is absolutely sincere in his beliefs."

McCain pleaded for a more civilized debate on healthcare: "He is sincere in his beliefs, we just happen to disagree. And he is the president. And let's be respectful.”

I wish more of our representatives on “The Hill” had the honor and courage Senator John McCain showed by crossing party lines to defend his ex rival and his president. He is the essence of what it means to be a true America.

As a footnote to all of this several senators have decided to exclude a provision on End-Of-Life care from the House version of the Healthcare Reform proposed bill. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement on August 13th that the provision had been dropped from consideration because it could be misinterpreted or implemented incorrectly. Someone is listening.

References:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07242009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/deadly_doctors_180941.htm
http://www.examiner.com/x-12837-US-Headlines-Examiner~y2009m8d15-Ezekiel-Emanuel-the-Deadly-Doctor-has-sister-with-Cerebral-Palsy-and-Sarah-Palin
http://www.scribd.com/doc/18280675/Principles-for-Allocation-of-Scarce-Medical-Interventions
http://www.thelancet.com/lancet-about
http://www.theodoresworld.net/archives/2009/08/rep_michele_bachmann_discusses.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betsy_McCaughey
http://www.fresh-thinking.org/publications/JAMA_perfect_storm.pdf
McCain video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2U4wQEF65w