Dear Member of Congress:
Your vote isn’t the only one that counts. November is coming and you can’t hide from the voters. Corrupt backroom deals are driving a government takeover of our health care, and I don’t like it. If you vote YES on the health care bill, I will vote NO on you in the next election.
“The President and Congress are focused on ramming through their health-care bill, whatever it takes, whatever the cost.”
Well… you know, sometimes they get bitter, and they cling to health care…
Senator Scott Brown:
“An entire year has gone to waste,” Brown said in the weekly GOP radio and Internet address. “Millions of Americans have lost their jobs, and many more jobs are in danger. Even now, the president still hasn’t gotten the message.
“Somehow, the greater the public opposition to the health care bill, the more determined they seem to force it on us anyway.”
We need to drop this whole scheme of federally controlled health care, start over, and work together on real reforms at the state level that will contain costs and won’t leave America trillions of dollars deeper in debt,”
Michelle Malkin leads with the facts as always, and an invitation to tea party activists, “Here’s your opportunity to reach across the aisle.” Seems Henry Waxman shortcircuited debate to “ram eco-taxes through Congress.” The NRCC sent out a fact sheet pointing out the woes of the radical tax plan. Dems in energy states fear the down-down-down side of this plan.
Michelle’s summary of the facts (H/T):
After stalling actions in Congress in the face of political pressure on the national energy tax, tempers boiled over among party leaders:
“Tensions over the direction of a sweeping climate change bill boiled over in a House Democratic leadership meeting Thursday, as Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (Calif.) lashed out at Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.) for appearing to publicly downgrade the measure’s chances this year. ‘This is not helpful,’ Waxman told Van Hollen, citing reports that presented the party’s campaign chief as opposing aggressive action on the bill, sources familiar with the meeting said.” (Dennis and Newmyer, “Democrats Clash on Climate Change,” Roll Call, May 4, 2009)
Seeing one of his key campaign proposals on life-support in Congress, Obama drags Energy Committee members to the White House to resuscitate this job-killing proposal:
“Waxman declined to comment when asked if the markup would start this week, saying only that he remains committed to moving the bill by Memorial Day…. But with the climate bill in dire straits at the subcommittee level, Obama decided it was time to weigh in.” (Darren Samuelsohn, ‘We’re working out the issues,’ House Dems say after Obama climate meeting, New York Times, 5/5/09)
“President Barack Obama summoned 36 House Democrats to the White House on Tuesday to urge them to agree on climate and energy legislation that is under increasing criticism from Republicans and members of his own party.” (Dina Cappiello, “White House, House GOP Convene Meetings on Climate,” The Associated Press, 5/5/09)
Still Democrats Aren’t Willing to Support a National Energy Tax:
“But House Democrats have yet to reach a deal on key aspects of the far-reaching package, including credits to affected industries, a timetable for reaching reductions in carbon emissions and the specifics of a new mandate for renewable electricity.” (Dennis and Newmyer, “Energy Reform Limps Ahead,” Roll Call, 5/6/09)
THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS OF BAD POLICY:
Facing tough re-elections next year, Dems in manufacturing and energy-producing districts desperately distance themselves from the National Energy Tax:
Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT): “Matheson has already been taking political shots from both sides on the bill. For example, the National Wildlife Federation ran full-page ads in the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune on Tuesday urging voters to call Matheson and ‘tell him it’s time to target climate change.’ The National Republican Congressional Committee on Monday issued a news release attacking him and questioning whether he will “support a national energy tax that could burden thousands and kill jobs.” (Davidson, “Matheson says Democrats moving too fast on climate-change bill,” Deseret News, 5/5/09)
Rep. Charles Melancon (D-LA): “At this point Melancon said he can’t support the draft because it would shut down the state’s energy coast. Melancon’s vote could have a detrimental effect on getting the measure out of committee. ‘I believe this bill would create an undue burden on families who are already paying too much in energy bills and on an industry that provides thousands of Louisianians with good jobs,’ Melancon said.” (Gerard Shields, “La. Democrats Key Figures In Federal Emissions Debate,” Baton Rouge Advocate, 5/2/09)
Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA): “‘What I’ve seen so far is nowhere near where it needs to be for me to support it,’ Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) told POLITICO. ‘Any way you do it, it hurts Pennsylvania, especially western Pennsylvania.’ ‘I think cap and trade is bad policy,’ said Altmire.” (Alex Isenstadt, “Cap And Trade Hits Speed Bumps,” Politico, 4/27/09)
Rep. John Boccieri (D-OH): “‘My understanding from what I’ve heard is it’s going to cause a big increase in our utility bills.’ Boccieri said the White House has been lobbying him heavily, but, ‘in its present form, cap and trade would be devastating to Ohio.’” (Robert Wang, “Boccieri Holds Telephone Town Hall Meeting,” Canton Repository, 3/25/09)
Rep. Baron Hill (D-IN): “Among coal-district Democrats like Hill, whose southeastern Indiana seat tilts conservative, reservations about a climate change bill are equally apparent. ‘I just can’t support it with the way it’s being proposed,’ said Hill, noting that 96 percent of Indiana is dependent on coal. ‘The bill in its current form is going to increase the rates for the people I represent.’” (Alex Isenstadt, “Cap And Trade Hits Speed Bumps,” Politico, 4/27/09)
Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR): “Rep. Mike Ross, Arkansas Democrat and one of the moderate members whom party leaders will have to persuade in order to secure passage, said he was concerned about the price consumers would have to pay if utilities passed along the cost of buying carbon permits to customers. ‘If you don’t like $4-a-gallon gasoline, you’re really not going to like your electric bill sometime between now and 2030,’ he said.” (Tom LoBianco, “House Lawmakers Take Stands In Hearings On Climate Change,” The Washington Times, 4/22/09)
Priests for Life reports:
Baby Body Parts
Priests for Life has known for some time of the grisly trade in baby parts taking place in abortion facilities throughout the nation. Through the efforts of our friends at Life Dynamics, Inc., the details of this trade have come to light. You may obtain from Life Dynamics (1-800-401-6494) copies of the actual order forms used. Some of the forms request that there be no abnormalities. Many mistakenly think that abortions in later stages of pregnancy are performed only in cases of fetal abnormality.
Fetal tissue wholesalers are companies which place employees in abortion clinics to harvest tissue, limbs, organs, etc. from aborted babies. This material is then shipped to researchers working for universities, pharmaceutical companies and government agencies. Although it is against federal law to sell human tissue or body parts, these organizations have devised a system to circumvent this restriction. Technically, all fetal material they harvest is “donated” to them by the clinics. However, they do pay a “site fee” to the clinics for the right to access the tissue. The tissue is then “donated” to the researchers who in turn pay the wholesalers for the cost of retrieval. Profit is realized by the wholesalers’ ability to set their own retrieval fees.
As to the harsh realities of keeping our country safe, the Gateway Pundit says Fox reports:
The release of the photos along with Obama’s decision last week to release CIA memos has federal agents feeling dispirited.
Jake Tapper reported:
Calling the ACLU push to release the photographs “prurient” and “reprehensible,” Dr. Mark M. Lowenthal, former Assistant Director of Central Intelligence for Analysis and Production, tells ABC News that the Obama administration should have taken the case all the way to the Supreme Court.
“They should have fought it all the way; if they lost, they lost,” Lowenthal said. “There’s nothing to be gained from it. There’s no substantive reason why those photos have to be released.”
Lowenthal said the president’s moves in the last week have left many in the CIA dispirited, based on “the undercurrent I’ve been getting from colleagues still in the building, or colleagues who have left not that long ago.”
“We ask these people to do extremely dangerous things, things they’ve been ordered to do by legal authorities, with the understanding that they will get top cover if something goes wrong,” Lowenthal says. “They don’t believe they have that cover anymore.” Releasing the photographs “will make it much worse,” he said.
Along the same lines of disclosures that hurt our country, Michelle Malkin points to the Rasmussen report in her, “Public to White House”:
Results from the latest Rasmussen poll show a public more in tune with Dick Cheney than George Soros:
Fifty-eight percent (58%) believe the Obama administration’s recent release of CIA memos about the harsh interrogation methods used on terrorism suspects endangers the national security of the United States. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 28% believe the release of the memos helps America’s image abroad.
Thirty-seven percent (37%) of voters now believe the U.S. legal system worries too much about protecting individual rights when national security is at stake. But 21% say the legal system is too concerned about protecting national security. Thirty-three percent (33%) say the balance between the two is about right.
This reflects a significant shift over the past couple of years. In several surveys conducted during 2008, Americans were fairly evenly divided as to whether our legal system worried too much about individual rights or too much about protecting national security…
…Forty-six percent (46%) of voters disagree with Obama’s decision to close the prison camp for terrorism suspects at the Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba, while 36% agree with the president’s action. Support for the decision has fallen since the president announced it in January.
Ed Morrissey says more:
Instead of the headlines being about what the Bush administration sanctioned, they became about Nancy Pelosi’s denial and then non-denial of her knowledge on waterboarding interrogations, the success of the interrogations in preventing an attack, and Obama’s lack of testicular fortitude in sticking with his original position to let sleeping dogs lie. Small wonder that he began backtracking in earnest yesterday when meeting with Congressional leaders.
Now we have confirmation that Obama planned this all along as a political attack against a man who hardly matters on the national political scene any longer – or at least he didn’t until Obama decided to pick a fight with him. Just as with his strange attack on Rush
It was a good day for Life at the Capitol today. It wasn’t that Congress did anything to protect the human life growing in a mother’s womb. Congress it seems is insensitive to Truth these days. However, ordinary Americans continue to demonstrate for Life. Young and old found their voice and pleaded with those who listened to hear the cries of the unborn. Children distributed life calling-cards proclaiming the truth of abortion and pro-choice. Someone dies and it isn’t pretty. The consequence of pro-choice is blood and tears. A banner photograph of the aborted infant offended some who is seems aren’t offended by the act of abortion. Strange sensitivities that allow the actual infant to die but want to spare their consciences, I must think.