By Kelly L. Goodridge and Oscar De Los Santos

It’s official: If the massive government takeover of health care goes through, Medicare spending will shrink.  The Democrats are busy building a 60-vote consensus for government-run health care and on Thursday (Dec. 3), the Senate voted to pass its projected $400 billion-dollar cut to Medicare.

Yep.  Sarah Palin was right.  They’re planning “Death Panels” for senior citizens and those who plan to benefit from Medicare in the future.  Mark Levin calls the bill a “runaway train” and challenged Republicans to stop making amendments to the bill, especially when they don’t like “the guts” of it (Levin, WELI 960, 12/04/09).  If Democrats get their way, many of us will be left waiting at the station. Even worse, we may not even get a ticket for this shoddy train ride.  Instead, we will be at the mercy of bureaucrats who will decide our care and treatments. 

These are the same bureaucrats who have exempted themselves from the bill they’re proposing for us; the same group that plunged unemployment to double digits and tripled the national deficit in less than a year.  They’re part of the administration that sides with climate criminals, have little to no private sector job experience and use vulgar nicknames for those who protest their power grabs and spending.

Who wants the single-payer plan or any other plan we can sum up as Obamacare? No one but Obama & Co. and a few other deluded Liberals. According to the latest Rasmussen poll on the subject, 62% of Americans oppose the single-pay system “where the federal government provides coverage for everyone” (December 3, 2009, http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/november_2009/62_oppose_single_payer_health_care_system).

If single pay is so great, why are Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid fighting tooth and nail to ramrod the plan through Congress as quickly as possible? Wouldn’t they want to get a reform as monumental as health care right before implementing a single part of it? Of course not. They care only about staying in power and they’re even willing to sacrifice some of their own to get the plan through.

This is kamikaze governance at its most blatant. Citizens throughout the nation – via E-mails, telephone calls, town hall meetings with their senators and representatives, visits to Congress and various other means – have done their best to voice their disapproval of Obamacare. Yet it doesn’t matter to the mad conductors.

No matter what kind of spin the charlatans put on it, the single-payer numbers always come out wrong. The latest alarming figures come from the Congressional Budget Office, which “predicts that 6.4 million people who now get insurance through their employer will lose that coverage and buy insurance on the non-group market: The [Harry Reid Senate health care] bill would push many employers who have older or sicker workers to simply end their existing insurance plan, forcing these workers into the non-group market.” Don’t count on younger and healthier insured in the same pool balancing the pool if they’re in with those older and in need of more care. In fact, “The biggest losers would be the younger, healthier people who get insurance in the non-group market: Their premiums would rise because Reid’s regulations would force them to subsidize that influx of older, sicker people that his ‘reform’ drives out of the group market” (Rea Hederman, “You Will Pay More,” New York Post, December 2, 2009).

Also, the bill will reduce health care procedures that aren’t life threatening (knee operations and hip replacements, for instance) – so roll out the wheelchairs and practice using crutches.

Factor in the cost of family insurance packages that the CBO predicts will spike by 16% and we’re forced once again to wonder if anyone seriously thinks that the cockeyed systems Congress is concocting are any better than what’s in existence right now.

We conclude this crazy-train analogy by pleading with those in government who oppose Obamacare to continue to take a stand against it – or to jump off this disaster in the making and join the sensible. That includes Liberal members of Congress. Regardless of the hell Pelosi and Reid have promised to level on defectors, the latter should recognize that their only prayer of getting re-elected is giving We the People what we want – and what we want is NOTHING to do with socialized medicine, i.e., single-payer insurance, i.e., Obamacare.

Should we believe White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs when he claimed that President Barack Hussein Obama wouldn’t be watching last night’s election returns? Of course not. Why? Because unless Obama was intrigued by the Bowling Green at Buffalo nail biter, it was a slow TV night – except of course, for the election returns.

OK thinks that like everything else about this administration, what we were told wasn’t what was going on behind the scenes. We think Obama & Co. anticipated last night’s results. In fact, we think several TVs were on inside the White House last night and that Obama checked out election returns with the rest of us. Moreover, we believe what he saw frightened him as much as any scary movie on the tube on Halloween night.

Yesterday’s election returns hammered home what many of us have sensed was brewing the past few months. Last night was the exclamation point of the statement carved by the TEA parties, angry citizens protesting the senseless healthcare bills, the September 12^th D.C. conservative invasion and those who believe the last stimulus bill did about as much good as a fully wired house when the electric company shuts off the juice.

It’s more than a feeling now. It’s a certainty – and it can be summed up in a few words: CONSERVATISM IS ON THE RISE.

More than that, the GOP victories are “a warning shot” as Eric Cantor (R-VA) summed up the Virginia takeover, “and it says to the moderate Democrats in the House that they ought to think twice about continuing to pursue the policies of this White House and (White House Speaker) Nancy Pelosi” (“GOP Gains Could Hurt Obama Political Capital, If Not Agenda,” November 4, 2009, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/03/gop-gains-hurt-obama-capital-agenda/).

Virginia voters gave conservatives throughout the land a triple gift: a new conservative governor (Bob McDonnell), a re-elected conservative lieutenant governor (Bill Bolling) and a conservative attorney general (Ken Cuccinelli). So much for Obama’s star power. The ads he cut for Dem loser Creigh Deeds sounded more like bombastic leftover Obama for Prez sound bytes and didn’t help Deeds at all.

But it may be New Jersey voters who rattled Dems the most. Governor Corzine is out, in spite of slamming challenger Chris Christie for everything from sidestepping ethics laws to being overweight. Christie will be the Garden State’s new helmsman, leaving Corzine to mull over his campaign failure and Obama’s three Corzine campaign visits to Jersey, which did little to help the governor’s cause.

Let’s not forget that even before conservatives stormed the polls, they had already made it clear they’re tired of centrists and those who go the wishy-washy route. Case in point: RINO Dede Scozzafava withdrew from New York’s 23^rd Congressional District race after feeling conservative heat. She then fully exposed her liberal colors by backing Democrat Bill Owens. Although Owens defeated conservative Doug Hoffman, it was good to see Scozzafava buckle under pressure and fully out herself.

We need much more of the true conservatism we witnessed last night – and it’s coming. This is one show to be a part of, a show not to be missed. We predict its ratings will soar in the 2010 season. (Don’t miss any more episodes, Mr. President.)

By Kelly L. Goodridge and Oscar De Los Santos

Are the Democrats the Racism Party?

Just when OK thought the race(ism) card was too worn out for liberals to do anything more than retire it from the life deck, Obama-media has once again resurrected it.  It’s a strategy designed to keep Conservatives and the Right on the defensive.  The Left’s current target is talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently lectured us on the importance of civility and accountability for one’s words.  She suggested that a lack of civility could lead to violence.  However, the Left loves to sermonize while isolating and smearing any dissent.  An avid football fan, Rush announced last week that he and others were bidding on the NFL’s St. Louis Rams franchise.  His news brought about an all out assault, and hateful speech from MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, who fantasized about Rush’s death on air.

Now the usual suspects are playing the tattered card again – Leftist liars like Al “The Harlem P1mp” Sharpton.  Sharpton has never had a problem smearing political opponents with information based on rumor and innuendo.  Recall that he earned fame for the Tawana Brawley fake-rape hoax 20 years ago.

Then there’s that ol’ race baiter, Jesse Jackson, who joined the latest controversy and offered hateful slander to the AP yesterday (October 13, 2009), an organization Rush calls “AP-Obama” and part of “the state-run media.”  Jackson maintains that Rush, “should not have the privilege of owning an NFL franchise . . .” (“Jesse Jackson on Rush Limbaugh's possible NFL ownership: ‘He should not have the privilege of owning . . .’ Ancestors rolling over in graves at 5000 RPMs,” www.theblogprof.blogspot.com, October 13, 2009).

Of course, this isn’t the first time that Limbaugh has been targeted as the Left’s punching bag.  Recall that President Obama laughed at Wanda Sykes’ joke about Rush dying of kidney failure at the White House Correspondents’ dinner in May.

Screams of “Racism!”

In part, the latest tempest involves a statement falsely attributed to Limbaugh.  Rush has publicly denied ever saying that “slavery has merits,” yet slipshod journalists at CNN, MSNBC, The Huffington Post, The Washington Post and others have taken the Wikipedia posting and reported it as fact, when it’s slander.  There is no source listed for the posting, but that’s good enough for the “state-run media” and its agenda.  The Huffington Post put out a cartoon video yesterday that shows Rush changing the Rams uniforms into Klan uniforms (www.hotairpundit.blogspot.com, 10/14/09). 

Limbaugh guest host Mark Steyn is among those who have come to Rush’s defense.  Steyn challenges, “So where are these racist soundbites? Where’s the audio? Where’s the transcript? Name the year. Heigh-ho, say CNN’s Rick Sanchez and the rest of the basement-ratings crowd. Not our problem: It’s for Limbaugh to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he’s never said it. We’re too busy fact-checking anti-Obama jokes to fact-check our own reporting . . .” (Mark Steyn, “The Corner,” The National Review, www.corner.nationalreview.com, October 13, 2009).  Brent Bozwell, president of Media Research Center, has demanded that CNN and MSNBC prove that radio talk show king Rush uttered racist comments they have attributed to him as fact (www.myfreedompost.com, October 14, 2009).

Sorry Leftists, with 20 Million+ Listeners, He’s Not Rushing into Obscurity

Rush is not a racist.  His ratings and millions of loyal fans prove it.  Sources claim his recently renewed contract is valued at $400 million.  That’ll keep him on the air through 2016.  The New York Times claims that Limbaugh’s annual salary is around $38 million (Matt Drudge, “LIMBAUGH SIGNS THROUGH 2016;  $400 MILLION DEAL SHATTERS BROADCAST RECORDS,” www.drudgereport.com/flashrl.htm, July 1, 2008). The Left disagrees with his political views but then again, the KKK was a Democrat creation, a fact Rush readily points out.

Limbaugh spoke on air yesterday about suing the individuals and news organizations that are attempting to smear him in this libelous fashion.  Let’s hope he wins.  There’s too much anger, hate and lying being tossed about.

Sadly, this abuse of power begins at home: namely, The White House.  Recently, President Obama said he would not grant FOX News any interviews until at earliest 2010.  We’ve heard Obama admonish people for listening to Rush Limbaugh and then expecting to get things done.  Who’s playing low-blow partisan politics more these days, the Left or Right?

Rush understands the true face of racism and socialism and speaks out against Obama’s plans for our country.  OK suspects the liberal press was given its marching orders to engage in a new Rush attack.  The schemers knew most people wouldn’t fact check the slandering news sources and simply rush to judgment on the latest “Rush is a racist” smears.

We’re also sure the Smear Rush edict came with a convenient copy of the tired old race card, to be used liberally, as always.

By Kelly L. Goodridge and Oscar De Los Santos

Our U.S. Constitution, the law of the land, was 222 years old on September 17, but President Barack Obama’s recent actions leave OK wondering if Constitutional Law is still governing the USA.  Obama took an oath to uphold the Constitution, but Constitution Day passed without any recognition from Obama.  Given his penchant for reworking our country, this shouldn’t surprise anyone – but nevertheless, the slap stings.

Obama is on video stating he believes the Constitution is an “imperfect” document” that has “deep flaws in American culture – Colonial culture” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_xNyrzB0xI). He’s also said that he views it as a “living-breathing document.”  It’s no surprise then that Obama appointed Supreme Court Justice Sonia Maria Sotomayor, who’s also on video stating that the “Court of Appeals is where policy is made.”  Again, Justice Sotomayor took an oath to uphold the Constitution, not change it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfC99LrrM2QYouTube).

Perhaps Obama is hoping that his 30 plus czars that he appointed and are accountable only to him and exempt from Congressional oversight – another unconstitutional move – will help him override the Constitution.  His regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, has proposed that Federal Law should not be interpreted by judges, but rather by the U.S. President.  In fact, Sunstein’s Yale Law School scholarship includes a proposal that “the executive (president) should usually be permitted to interpret (law) as it reasonably sees fit” (“Obama Should Interpret Law, Not Courts,” The Obama File, 9/16/09 (www.theobamafile.com).

Obama took an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, but he’s pushing forward his health care agenda.  The Wall Street Journal (9/18/09) and many others have challenged that the president’s health-care reform – ObamaCare – is unconstitutional.  That didn’t stop Michelle Obama from delivering a teary appeal today (9/18) to pass it, and Obama is scheduled to appear on a five-show media blitz on Sunday to sell it.  

Obama also abandoned planned missile-defense bases in Poland and the Czech Republic on his own – without oversight, debate or discussion by Congress and We the People (Michael Savage, 9/18/09, 960 WELI). 

Obama and his team have been treading over the Constitution since he took office, possibly even before he was inaugurated.  According to “birthers,” Obama has yet to produce a legitimate long form birth certificate as proof of his Constitutional eligibility to serve as President.  Several lawsuits have been filed requesting it. Some date back before the election.  Experts have also disputed the copy of Certificate of Live Birth that Obama posted on his “Fight the Smears” website.  However, Obama signed an order to seal all his records during his first day in office.

No matter how much naysayers poke fun and attempt to dismiss the “birthers,” news broke last week that Obama and Biden’s official DNC Official Certification and Nomination letter went out to all 50 states without the constitutional eligibility clause: “- and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provision of the United States Constitution.”  It’s the first time in American history that the letter has been signed off on without the required text, and – what a surprise! – Nancy Pelosi is at the center of the controversy.  She signed-off on Obama’s and Biden’s letter.  A complete letter is on file, but letters omitting the constitutional text were sent out to the states.  Candidates are vetted by “respective Party Conventions,” and OK wonders why the constitutional clause was left off the DNC letters filed with the states.  Each party vets their own candidate and as J.B. Williams, who uncovered the discrepancy through the Freedom of Information Act, points out, “it’s like having the fox guard the hen house” (“The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don’t Lie,” J.B. Williams, www.canadafreepress.com, Sept. 10, 2009).

Obama’s presidential ambitions don’t appear to be upholding the Constitution. In fact, the Constitution seems to largely get in the way of his ambitions. Perhaps no greater proof exists than the way he wedged his way into the United Nations Security Council. There are major warnings against such a move (see Section 9 of the Constitution). Nevertheless, Obama chose himself to chair the United Nations Security Council. Shocking? Yes, but it’s beginning to seem that Obama and Co. regard any government edict passed prior to their ascension as a rule meant for others.

Many of Obama’s actions – particularly those that ignore the Constitution – smack more of kingly behavior than American presidential behavior. Again, by now we shouldn’t be surprised, but this president’s ongoing antics disturb and infuriate those of us who believe that Constitutional Law should be upheld, not disregarded.

By Oscar De Los Santos and Kelly L. Goodridge

Remember when Massachusetts Senator John Kerry was the Democrat Flip-Flop Poster Boy?  Nobody flip-flopped better than Kerry during the 2004 presidential race.  His hemming and hawing, this-ing and that-ing, served President George W. Bush well.  In fact, it helped him win the election.  To the very end, Kerry continued to go back and forth on positions.  Many Americans went to bed late on election night after hearing Kerry – the apparent loser – claim that he would not admit defeat until every vote was recounted.  Yet by the time many woke up, Kerry had already conceded the election to W.  That was some firm resolve on display.

Now it’s clear that flip-flopping is a Democratic disease – perhaps like liberalism itself.  In recent weeks, we’ve seen an alarming number of Dems stricken with it.

Take Senator Chris Dodd (D – CT) who claimed to be in the dark about the AIG bonuses, when it was he who wrote a provision into the bill that insured such payouts.  Dodd had to flip-flop on his denials and historical reconstructions after the truth leaked.

Then there’s House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who vociferously asserted she was clueless about the interrogation tactics used on Guantanamo detainees and other suspected terrorists captured by the American military.  After her comments were disputed, Pelosi changed her story and said the CIA briefed her on interrogation tactics but she didn’t think they would include waterboarding (Dan McLaughlin, “Nancy Pelosi Was Briefed On Waterboarding But Says She Didn’t Inhale,” April 24, 209, 4/24/09, http://www.redstate.com/dan_mclaughlin/2009/04/24/nancy-pelosi-was-briefed-on-waterboarding-but-says-she-didnt-inhale/). Some reports show that Pelosi was briefed as far back as 2002 – and as many as 30 times – on interrogation tactics such as waterboarding. So she knew about these techniques for years and neither said nor did a thing about them until they became a hot-button topic.

But it’s President Barrack Hussein Obama whose flip-flopping is most disturbing these days.  Obama vowed to close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility as soon as he became president.  With the flourish of a pen, he seemed to sign an order to do so.  Of course, that’s not happening anytime soon. OK can live with that.  We’re strong advocates of Gitmo interrogation procedures that have been squelched. We believe “Club Gitmo” (as El Rushbo calls the place) needs to stay open for business.

Anyone who claims that the military’s interrogation techniques at Gitmo and other detention centers are useless is in denial. Such tactics have yielded strong results. Look beyond what the Dems tell you and it’s clear that the interrogations have led to the capture of other terrorists and squelched plans to inflict more harm on America.  (Dick Morris covers such near misses in his powerful book, Fleeced.)

What alarms us about Obama’s flip-flopping is that he makes his country seem increasingly weaker in the eyes of the world.  Our enemies are laughing at us.  They recognize that Obama is naïve when it comes to making informed decisions.  Like a kid, he acts before thinking things through and then when he is informed that some moves can’t be implemented, no matter what he signed, he has to backpedal.

Cue global laugh track.  And the sitcom continues.

But for those of us living in America – especially those of us who didn’t vote for Obama – the new president’s antics are anything but funny.  In fact, they’re infuriating.

Obama’s latest flip-flop is really his most dangerous.  At first he claimed that those responsible for the previous administration’s prisoner interrogation techniques – procedures he regards as abusive – were going to be exposed and held accountable.  Then he decided – wisely – to let things be.  Yet a day later, Obama flip-flopped again and said he was leaving it up to the Attorney General to decide whether to pursue investigation of Bush administration interrogation officials.

If such a witch-hunt occurs, it’s another blow to America’s National Security.  Which future intelligence official is going to order any strong interrogation techniques if he knows his head may end up on the chopping block as soon as one administration exits and another enters?

This latest debacle on the part of Obama and his administration underscores their utter inexperience. They are babes playing grownup games.  Let’s do it this way – no, this way!  No, no, -- THIS WAY!  What could be more dangerous than letting kids run the country?

Even their revelation process designed to convince us that an interrogation commission is needed is flawed. In the interest of “transparency” (what a joke), Obama green lighted the release of memos that ostensibly reveal that harsh interrogation procedures on Gitmo detainees yielded no valuable information. However, even the mainstream media now admits that such a position is flawed.

Worse: Rather than act to advance transparency, Obama & Co.’s release of the memos was designed to obfuscate the truth. They released only a few memos; those that show that past interrogation techniques yielded valuable information were withheld. Vice President Dick Cheney recently requested that the full documents be released. This needs to happen. He says the unreleased documents show that lives were saved as a result of government interrogations. 

President George W. Bush once said, “Building a durable peace requires . . . tough realism in our dealings with China and Russia.  It requires firmness with regimes like North Korea and Iraq, regimes that hate our values and resent our success.  And the foundation of our peace is a strong, capable, and modern American military.”  He never shifted from his resolve.

Oh, and by the way, Bush made those statements in his book, A Charge to Keep, before he was first elected president (see p. 239).  Even then, as Governor of Texas, Bush knew what it would take to keep our country safe, and that if elected, he had “a charge to keep.”  He never flip-flopped or looked back.

Thanks, W.  Maybe Obama and staff will finally quit regarding everything you did a mistake, study your moves and implement some of them.  That’s one flip-flop from the Obama administration that we would welcome.

By Kelly L. Goodridge and Oscar De Los Santos

The unscrupulous liberal media showed no principles this week in its especially nasty and ferocious attacks while covering the TEA – taxed enough already - Parties held across the country on April 15. It appears the press only wants to cover anti-war protestors, gay rights activists, and a handful of ladies dressed in pink, not a million or more Americans turning out in hundreds of cities across America to protest government’s wasteful spending. The New York Times didn’t cover the events, maintaining their standard of lying by omission. President Obama said he wasn’t familiar with the TEA Parties, but gave a televised tax day talk on his plans for the economy at a time when many TEA Parties were taking place.

TEA Parties gave taxpayers of diverse party affiliations a voice. Together, the outraged protested careless government spending and demanded fiscal reform. The crowds – lively but orderly – told Congress to stop passing bills they haven’t read. Many Americans, alarmed by the mounting debt under Obama’s administration, showed up to protest bailouts used as excuses to nationalize industries. Thousands of taxpayers are incensed that the government is using taxation to redistribute wealth. Still others are outraged that government gives income tax rebates to those who’ve never paid taxes.

Taxpayers are upset by the ballooning deficit, thanks to a Congress controlled by Democrats since 2006. Finally, the masses turned out to voice disapproval over the record number of tax cheats in Obama’s cabinet, including Treasury Secretary Timothy “Turbo Tax” Geithner, who failed to pay his own taxes but will soon be signing our currency.

By every measure, the TEA Parties were a resounding success. The crowds made a statement, even if the liberal press chose to largely ignore them or denigrate them. For instance, CNN lead anchor and media hack Anderson Cooper said, “It’s hard to talk when you’re tea bagging.” His vulgar comment reveals that the TEA Party grassroots movement scares the Left – and that Cooper may have given his mommy, Gloria Vanderbilt, some juicy tidbits as she penned her soon-to-be released “smut novel” (see Rita Delfiner, “MOM PORN TO BE WILD – COOPER,” New York Post, April 7, 2009).

House Speaker Madame Pelosi called the TEA Parties an “Astroturf,” movement and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D. Ill.) blamed the gatherings on "right-wing Republicans" and called attendees “despicable and shameful.” (It’s ironic that on tax day, Schakowsky’s husband pleaded guilty to violations of bank fraud, writing rubber checks and failing to collect withholding tax from an employee. With two felony counts, he faces four years in prison; sentencing is scheduled later this year.)

President Obama’s top advisor David Axelrod labeled the TEA Parties “unhealthy.” He said, “I think any time that you have severe economic conditions, there is always an element of disaffection that can mutate into something that’s unhealthy” (“Obama Take a Dim View of Tea Parties,” Washington AP, April 19, 2009). Since when is organized and orderly dissent “unhealthy?” Last time we checked, rioting and the Democratic National Convention used to corner the market on “unhealthy” gatherings.

Perhaps the ultimate proof that TEA Parties scared the Obama administration was the fact that the FBI kept close watch on the gatherings. That’s right: orderly taxpayer protests proved so disturbing to Obama, Inc. that more frivolous spending was implemented to watchdog them. In other words, the TEA Party gatherers hired out the ultimate security guards for the event – since taxpayer dollars paid for the FBI to be at the TEA Parties.

K of OK, We’re Right attended a TEA Party.  Here’s a dynamic review of her experience:

Keene, New Hampshire: My father, stepmother, son and I all attended a TEA party on April 15 in Keene.  Thanks to my artistic stepmother, we were equipped with Taxed Enough Already signs. My dad wore tea bags stapled to his cap. Over a hundred of us attended the hour-long protest. The coordinator was pleased with the turnout, since she said she had planned it only the night before and posted notices on the Web. She was on her way to another TEA party later that day.

It was a multi-generational event (three generations in my family alone). Senior citizens attended, younger people stopping by during their lunch break, children mingled. It was my fourteen year-old son’s first protest.

This TEA Party, like all held that day, was high-energy. Attendees were eager to talk with one another and share their views. Colorful signs, flags and caps waved in the breeze above our heads. Among my favorite signs was one that read: “Next time read the bill!”

We stood on the Town’s Green. Cars honked their horns in support as they drove by. Suddenly, one baiter leaned out of his pickup and yelled, “Obama gave you a tax break! If you were working, you’d know that!”

Well, I don’t know about the other TEA Party attendees, but I’d hardly call $13 a month (reduced to $8.00 in January) that I’ll be taxed on at the end of the year much of a break, especially when Obama and company are spending and taxing us trillions of dollars into debt.

OK knows the TEA Party momentum will continue and that the Left will continue to smear future displays of dissent. The media will even label such smears “news” – but the real news is that something significant has begun. We’d call it “change,” if a certain leader hadn’t compromised the term. Oh, hell, we’ll do it anyway: Change is happening in America – The Right Change – and it scares Obama, the Left and the liberal media because they know they can’t control it or keep it from growing.

By Oscar De Los Santos and Kelly L. Goodridge

Barack Hussein Obama’s dependence on teleprompter speeches and suggested responses on his laptop screen to help him field softball questions from the lamestream media might cause some to question the new president’s ability to think for himself. Such questioning is certainly warranted. Broken campaign promises leave us with the impression that Obama is at best an inept huckster. At worst, he may be a puppet whose strings are being pulled.

Words come easy when they’re scripted, but substance and the opportunity to demonstrate character seem nonexistent to Obama. After all, he could have vetoed the pork from the stimulus bill and the omnibus budget, as he promised he would during his campaign. Instead, Obama signed away and turned bill and budget into law.

Much was made of President George W. Bush’s speech patterns, but OK loved them because it was obvious we were getting honesty from Bush: genuine, heartfelt rhetoric. In his responses came the voice of a leader true to his convictions, with a firm vision for running and protecting the United States. OK says give us W’s unscripted responses any day rather than Obama’s carefully prepared speechmaking.

It’s so bad that the new president even uses the teleprompter to introduce new appointees. Why? In fact, the teleprompter is even rolled out at White House parties (such as the St. Patrick’s Day gathering last week). Again, we wonder why.

We’ve heard about Obama’s flair for the written word; that he writes much of his own material. Yet Obama has as many speechwriters as any president – perhaps more. And if one studies Obama’s non-scripted speeches, he sounds much less sure of himself than when he’s reading off the teleprompter.

Last Christmas, Karl Rove, who served as Senior Advisor to President George W. Bush for seven years, revealed his former boss to be a voracious reader. According to Rove, W “reads instead of watching TV. He reads on Air Force One and to relax and because he's curious. He reads about the tasks at hand, often picking volumes because of the relevance to his challenges.” Rove talked about their reading contests, which began in 2006. Rove won each round – but not by much: In 2006, he read 110 books to W’s 95. The following year, Rove won again, besting W 76 to 51. And in 2008, Rove took the prize again with a 64 to 40 upset.

Contra those who regarded Bush as a buffoon, Rove’s picture doesn’t paint a loser but rather someone in charge of a nation who still found time to feed his intellectual hungers. Far from the clown the press loved to cast him as, George W. Bush was a thinker. As Rove observes, his friend “plays up being a good ol' boy from Midland, Texas, but he was a history major at Yale and graduated from Harvard Business School. You don't make it through either unless you are a reader” (Karl Rove, “Bush Is a Book Lover,” Wall Street Journal, December 26, 2008, www.wsj.com). 

W skeptics believed Vice President Dick Cheney called most of the shots in Bush 43’s administration, but extensive scrutiny of both men reveals that Cheney was a partner in running the country, but W was definitely in charge.

Now that W is gone, who’s minding the store? Is Obama the puppetmaster or a puppet whose strings are being pulled by someone in the rafters? We wager he’s the latter – and that’s worrisome on a multiplicity of levels.

A president needs to be in charge of the country. Moreover, if Obama is just mouthing off what’s being scripted for him, it reveals that the puppetmaster – be it David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, George Soros, or The Wizard of Oz – is as incompetent as the puppet he commands.

The Obama administration is passing bills that will cripple America with increasing taxes. This behavior ignores economists’ warnings that taxing a country into prosperity won’t work.

But we have more to worry about than jacked up taxes. The Obama administration is making wrong decision after wrong decision. The porkulus bill brings on an orgy of spending. The national recovery act that’s supposed to herald a flood of new jobs has yet to kick in. In fact, each week brings news of more industries cutting more jobs.

Polls are starting to show that the American people don’t like Obama’s policies or broken promises. House Speaker Nancy “Queen” Pelosi’s recent mention of a second stimulus package caused taxpayers to agonize over the government’s continuing plans to pickpocket our wallets and bloat itself ever larger.

By Kelly L. Goodridge and Oscar De Los Santos

Congress recently passed two of the most grotesque bills to ever lumber across its chambers – a $789 billion stimulus bill and a $410 billion spending bill for government agencies. President Barrack Hussein Obama signed both into law.  Shortly thereafter, we learned that the stimulus bill is laden with special interests. The almost nine thousand earmarks buried in the omnibus budget equates to a catchall spending bill for most federal agencies.  In fact, there’s so much pork and personal agenda in the massive bills that like archeologists on an amazing dig, we’re still chipping – er, reading – away and making discoveries.  And like explorers in the old Mummy movies, we’re running into fiends in these rhetorical labyrinths that spook our souls now and will drain our pocketbooks in the months to come.

Many claim that House Speaker Nancy “Queen” Pelosi co-wrote the stimulus bill, which strips E-Verify for job candidates. Without verification of a job candidate’s citizenship or eligibility status, as many as 300,000 of the construction jobs created to rebuild our country’s infrastructure can go to illegal aliens instead of taxpaying citizens. For once OK agrees with The Daily Show host Jon Stewart’s outcry, “That’s Not Right!”

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) operate E-Verify. Since 1997 E-Verify has provided automated links to federal databases to help employers determine the eligibility of new hires and validate their Social Security numbers. In other words, E-Verify protects legal workers. By removing it from the stimulus bill, federal contractors and subcontractors will no longer be required to protect American citizens.

Now E-Verify is gone, its removal apparently intentional and part of Nancy Pelosi’s agenda. In fact, workplace raids are being suspended by the Obama administration ("The O'Reilly Factor," FOX News, March 19, 2009).  The Speaker of the House made treasonous comments at a recent talk at St. Anthony’s Church in San Francisco (March 14, 2009). Pelosi told legal (and we’re guessing illegal) immigrants that enforcement of existing immigration laws, as currently practiced is “un-American.” She went on to condemn raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents (ICE) and said, “the raids must end.” Pelosi also referred to the immigrants she was addressing as “very, very patriotic” (“Pelosi: “Enforcing Immigration Laws in the US is Un-American,” 3/18/09, www.patdollard.com).

In an earlier blog (“Napolitano, Part 2: or Home, Home(land Security) on the Range”), we reported that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development claims there are close to 30,000 known illegal immigrants that currently live in public housing.  The total estimate of illegal aliens living illegally in our country is 12-20 million (“The Rush Limbaugh Show,” 3/19/09).  Illegals work our employment and healthcare systems. They cost American citizens money. In some cases, illegals cost us lives. Don Feder, editor of BoycottNYT.com asserts, “Each year, illegal aliens rape, rob, and murder tens of thousands of Americans, as well as leaving a trail of carnage on our nation’s highways.”

Madame Speaker, how are illegal aliens who steal jobs, rape, rob and murder Americans patriotic? You told your audience that by showing up to your talk, they were taking “responsibility for our country.” Really? How, pray tell? This is one conundrum we can’t crack. Help us, Ms. Pelosi. Recruit others to explain your meaning if you must. Call Harry Reid. Thum’n – er, Summon Barney Frank. Bring us out of our mystified state. 

Pelosi took an oath as an officer of the United States. Her misguided comments “give aid or comfort to the enemies” of the United States. By making them she violated her oath and promise to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Moreover, her speech encouraged unchecked immigration. It persuaded illegal immigrants to break the law. She called for “immigration reform” and questioned raids and deportation of illegal aliens.

“What value system is that? I think it’s un-American,” said Pelosi of separating families that are here illegally. We think you’re un-American, Speaker Pelosi.

Irrespective of political affiliation, how can we have the Speaker of the House making such reckless comments? Pelosi’s latest spoutings reveal her to be a traitor to our country. We believe she deserves impeachment. 

By Kelly L. Goodridge and Oscar De Los Santos

So much for the accountable, responsible and transparent government that President Barack Hussein Obama promised during his campaign – it isn’t happening.  El Rushbo says we “face a tragic future” under this administration (Rush Limbaugh radio show, 2-13-09).  We couldn’t agree more.

After only a month in office, Obama has repeatedly broken campaign promises of transparency, promoted a bogus ‘stimulus bill’ that gives money to election fraud experts ACORN and other questionable causes such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s wetlands mouse.  We don’t yet know all that’s in the bill – it was posted as a PDF file and cannot be searched by word recognition as can Word documents – yet some members of Congress admitted that they voted on the thousand-page plus bill without having read it. Oh, and Obama’s camp didn’t give the public a chance to view the bill as he promised before the Senate cast its final vote.

With each day, the Obama administration grows more dictatorial and socialistic in its operations. There’s no transparency and increased lying coming out of the Hope and Change crew.

Obama’s recent power grab to move the U.S. Census to the White House is more cause for concern.  Rigging the Census sounds a lot like ACORN’s election rigging. So much so that last Thursday (2-12-09), the GOP threatened legal action.  At a news conference headlined by Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), Darrell Issa (R-CA) said he believes the federal courts will agree that the White House's efforts to assert greater oversight of Census Bureau operations violate the law.  In their letter, Boehner and 14 other Republicans warned that White House control of the census process would "result in the politicization of the Census and open the door to massive waste and abuse in the expenditure of taxpayer funds, billions of which are distributed on the basis of census data" (http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=42037&dcn=todaysnews).

Newt Gingrich calls Obama’s attempt to abscond with the Census “Nixonian.”  He offers his own combat strategy:  “. . . Republican senators should announce that no member of the Commerce Department will be cleared and approved until they put the census back in the Commerce Department” (CNSNEWS.com, http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=43519).

On Monday (2-16-09), White House political advisor David Axelrod defended Obama’s plan to take over the U.S. Census Bureau by placing it directly under the control of top White House officials. Axelrod claims that the Census will remain in the hands of “experts” who will run the program (Newsmax.com). The Obama File reports that such a move would turn statistical science “into something where speculation and guesswork could introduce egregious and prejudicial errors.” The Census grab reflects the Democrats’ “plain hope” to adjust Census numbers, carve stronger Democratic voting districts, redistribute funds, and win leverage with illegal aliens (theobamafile.com).

The signs are clear: when he isn’t making questionable decisions such as moving the Census to the Executive branch, Obama will likely continue to make false promises to move agendas across the table.  This is even true of the stimulus bill.  Now that the House and Senate have approved it, the President wants to tinker with it.  According to the New York Post, the bill is “tougher on slashing executive pay than he wanted.”

Obama’s desire to meddle with the Congress-passed stimulus bill has even put him at odds with his own party.  Barney Frank spoke against any further revision of the plan before the President signs off on it:  “This is not, frankly, the Bush administration, where they’re going to issue a signing statement and refuse to enforce it.  They will enforce it” (“Top Dem balks as O hints at stim change,” Feb. 16, 2009).

Don’t bank on it, Barney.  Not with the new prez’s track record and penchant for doing as he pleases, when he pleases.

By Kelly L. Goodridge and Oscar De Los Santos

Pork and Politics: A Love Story

We heard about “lipstick on a pig” during the last presidential election, but pork and politics are officially courting each other with an economic stimulus package that Democrats passed in the House last week.  Many conservatives, from John McCain to Rush Limbaugh find the $900-billion plan packed with “pork.”  In fact, El Rushbo has a unique name for the would-be spending spree:  He calls it a “porkulus” bill.

Label it what you will, the stimulus package, if passed as it was initially cast, is no more than a spending orgy of grotesque proportions thanks to unnecessary earmarks.  Sean Hannity has good reason to proclaim that if passed, “the big spending plan” will be “the end of capitalism as we know it” (“The Sean Hannity Show,” talk radio, 2-4-09).

Among the stimulus bill’s pork byproducts are programs that target unions, minorities, infrastructure, upgrading schools, birth control, preventing smoking and bailing out Hollyweird.  There’s little focus on the housing crisis or tax relief.  Instead, the bill is loaded with billions of dollars in wasteful spending.  For example, the bill will pump millions into the Department of Energy. $75 million is designed to help with non-smoking programs, $650 million for digital television coupons, $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts and $140 million for the Education Department (which is double what they spent last year - see “A Sham Stimulus” by Ed Feulner).  Yet another $140 million has been earmarked to examine the atmosphere.  And there’s even $246 million in tax relief so that Hollyweird can buy its film stock.  (This, for an industry that spends $150 to $200 million to make a blockbuster and another $100 million or more to market it.)  There’s also $8.4 billion proposed for the “Bureau of Indian Affairs” along with additional millions for health facilities and Indian reservation roads.

Oh, and we need $200 million to replace sod and repair the mall after the Obama inauguration. And thankfully, a few million dollars have been allocated for light bulbs and batteries.

Peddling the Pork

The Senate is currently reviewing the economic recovery plan.  Obama and camp are encouraging all senators to vote for the bill.  The media is hyping it as a “Rescue Plan.”  Obama has warned that a “catastrophe” is imminent if the bill doesn’t pass the Senate.  In fact, the situation is so dire that on February 3, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “500 million Americans lose their jobs every month.”  That’s a staggering number, considering that America is comprised of only 305 million citizens.

Thankfully, not everyone is pleased with the pork giveaway.  The Washington Post reported that Senator John McCain is proposing that the stimulus bill be cut to ½ trillion (see Shailagh Murray and Paul Kane).

Even Obama’s top economic advisor has expressed uncertainty about the stimulus job claims.  L. Brent Bozell III asserts that the bill is “larger than the combined cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan up until now!” (“It’s Not a Stimulus Bill,” CNSNEWS.com).

Most of the bill seems designed to help Democrats win votes in the next go round.  Bozell quotes economist Robert Brusca, who estimates “that only about 24 percent of the spending in the Senate plan can be categorized accurately as ‘stimulus,’ and the rest is either ‘cushion’ for the hard times, or categorized as ‘agenda’ spending, advancing Democratic policy dreams.”

There’s also been a lot of concern that much of the money designated for worthy programs will not be spent for about two years.  According to a study by the Congressional Budget Office, only about $136 billion of the designated $355 billion for infrastructure programs would be spent by October 1, 2010.  How is that cockeyed timeline going to help us with the current economic crisis?

Liberal Pork

Senator John McCain granted several interviews focused on the stimulus package on February 3 and 4, 2009.  In them, he stressed that he understands that Americans need relief – in essence, a stimulus package to jumpstart the economy.  However, President Obama’s stimulus plan as it is currently written is not the solution to America’s current economic problems.  McCain sees the same kind of earmarks and “pork-barrel” spending imbedded in the plan that he railed against throughout his presidential run.  It’s the kind of unnecessary spending that he vowed to eliminate if elected president and that he’s fighting against now, on Capitol Hill.  Bottom line:  “No bill is better than this bill,” McCain told Katie Couric.

He’s right.  Do we really need to allocate four million dollars to ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), a group suspected of having contributed to voter fraud and intimidation?  And as Michelle Malkin points out in “Stimulus Slush Fund for Housing Entitlement Thugs,” ACORN is only one faction of kindred troublemakers.  If the stimulus plan goes through, it will essentially grant “a bottomless slush fund for a bigger coalition of housing entitlement thugs” (Malkin).  Among these other groups is NACA (Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America), whose founder, Bruce Marks, has called himself a “bank terrorist.”