But oddly, those are the reasons so often given for implementing such a plan -- Barry Hussein has even said so.

But now we get to the truth, after the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has shown how costly and inefficient the current proposals really are.

But now Peter Orszag, Obama's director of the Office of Management and Budget has admitted the truth -- any savings are a long way off.

The point of the proposal, however, was never to generate savings over the next decade.

In other words, for a decade we will piss away even more money than would have otherwise been spent. And in return for spending more money, here's what we lose.

1. Freedom to choose what's in your plan
   
2. Freedom to be rewarded for healthy living, or pay your real costs
   
3. Freedom to choose high-deductible coverage
   
4. Freedom to keep your existing plan
   
5. Freedom to choose your doctors
   

So got that -- higher cost, less freedom. Are Americans really so stupid as to think that is a better deal? Because that is what Obama and his cronies are counting on to get this plan adopted.

Posted by: Greg at 05:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 2 kb.

I think this one from Dry Bones says it all.

After all, Obama's analogy only works if the following things were true in 1933.

• Jews controlled 97% of Europe while Germans controlled 3%.
  
• Jews were regularly murdering innocent German women and children in terror attacks.
  
• German policy was to avoid the killings of innocent Jewish civilians.
  
• Jewish acts of terror were blamed on German intransigence by the international community.
  
• Germany made repeated concessions to Jewish demands, while the Jews refused to live up to any agreement made with the Germans.
  

Of course, none of those conditions applied in Germany in 1933 -- but every single one of them has been the status quo for decades in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. So either Barack Obama is woefully ignorant of history, perniciously hateful of Jews, or simply finds it convenient to belittle the Holocaust by drawing an inapt moral equivalence between the innocent victims of the Holocaust and murderous aggressors in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Or perhaps all three.

Posted by: Greg at 12:02 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 181 words, total size 2 kb.

That's the only way to look at this one.

When companies accepted government bailouts, they were forbidden to send executives on junkets to resorts for conferences. There was talk about responsible use of taxpayer money

Government agencies, even ones that are insolvent in an age when we are running the largest deficits in US history, can still spend loads of taxpayer cash for such trips, though.

A Social Security Administration motivational management conference held at a high-end Valley resort last week cost $700,000, the SSA told the ABC15 Investigators.

Costs for the conference at the Arizona Biltmore Resort & Spa included airfare, hotel entertainment, dancers, motivational speakers, and food, an administration official said.

A spokesperson from the SSA's regional office said the conference was essential, that teleconferencing was not an option, and that all 675 managers needed to meet in person.

The SSA provided ABC15 with a list of courses provided at the conference, which included "Techniques to Empower You," "Mentoring the Generations," and "Emotional Intelligence."

But the information provided by the SSA did not mention an after-hours casino trip, family members staying at the hotel, or the 20-minute dance party ABC15 observed.

Just one more example of the Obama regime wanting to control you life while exempting government.

Posted by: Greg at 04:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 229 words, total size 2 kb.

Kay Bailey Hutchison is going all-out to make the 2010 gubernatorial primary a race. And her fundraising numbers certainly bear that out.

U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison had publicly vanished from the governor's race during the past several months, but burst back on the scene Monday with an announcement that she has $12.5 million for a campaign to knock Gov. Rick Perry out of office.

Hutchison said she will formally announce as a candidate next month. She described the $6.7 million she raised during the first half of this year as a record for a Texas politician.

“This is a huge victory,” Hutchison said.

Perry has announced that he raised $4.2 million in the final nine days of June and had $9.3 million in the bank.

Given the Texas Democrats' notoriously shallow bench, it is unlikely that any Democrat could even come close to either of these two Republicans. That means the GOP primary will be the election. Her's hoping that Texas Republicans make the correct choice by sending Rick Perry packing and nominating Kay to be our next governor.

Which, of course, will sets the stage for the election of Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams as our United States Senator.

Posted by: Greg at 04:11 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 2 kb.

If you hadn't been following the John Ensign story, this bit in Gail Collins' NY Times column would no doubt conjure up images of GOP senators and congressmen -- and a couple of pastors -- holding a massive Roman orgy.

But lately, the Ensign saga has become more and more fascinating. Every social conservative in Washington seems to have been involved.

Yeah, but HOW they were involved is the real key here.

They weren't sleeping with Ensign or his mistress.

They were urging their friend and colleague to break off the affair. They were encouraging him to reconcile with his wife. They were suggesting ways for him to mitigate the harm done to the family of his mistress and his own family. Indeed, it appears that they were trying to get him right with God.

In other words, they were acting like CHRISTIANS.

Remember -- one part of Christian teaching is that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Another is that we are all called to repent of our sins and strive to live a better life. And as I've read the revelations of the last couple of days, that's what I see members and spiritual advisers of a Christian group in Washington pushing Ensign towards -- repentance and reformation.

As more details come out about John Ensign, I am beginning to move towards a belief that he may need to resign. But that said, I'm rather proud of the decisions and actions of those who tried to get Ensign back on the straight and narrow path. After all, it is what they ought to have done consistent with their faith.

On the other hand, I'm rather ashamed of Gail Collins and her tawdry innuendo that appears designed to deceive rather than inform her readers.

Posted by: Greg at 12:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 312 words, total size 2 kb.

Let's see -- Arlen Specter is a Democrat who ran jumped ship to the GOP early in his career because it was the only way for him to get elected to public office. He recently jumped ship back to the Democrats (after decades as a Republican) when it became apparent that he was going to lose the GOP primary to someone who more closely represented the GOP platform. In other words, opportunistic party-switching is one of the defining characteristics of Specter's career.

So of course, having just switched to the Democrat Party this year so he can run for office as a Democrat, he is now accusing his opponent of having become a Democrat in 2006 just so he could run for office as a Democrat!

Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter called his fellow Democrat, Rep. Joe Sestak, a "flagrant hypocrite" and accused his rival of registering as a Democrat "just in time to run for Congress."

Sestak has said that he will challenge Specter, who has the backing of President Obama and party leaders, for the Democratic Senate nomination next year. Specter, a longtime Republican, switched his party registration to Democrat this year.

On Thursday, Specter's campaign sought to bring into question Sestak's roots to the Democratic Party. Specter's campaign sent out a list of Sestak's voting history in Delaware County, which the senator's campaign said showed that Sestak registered as an Independent in 1971, didn't vote in any primary elections from 1971-2005 and that he officially registered as a Democrat in February of 2006. Sestak was elected as a Democrat to the House in 2006.

Sestak's response? That as a military officer he remained a registered independent because he believes that military officers should not be a member of any political party. Having grown up on military bases as the son of a military officer, I've a number of officers who took precisely that position and acted upon it. It is a position I find principled and admirable, even if I would argue that voting in a primary does not undermine the non-artisan nature of the military. I'm therefore not offended at all by Sestak's voter registration history.

I am, on the other hand, quite offended by Specter's hypocrisy in accusing ANYONE of manipulating party registration just to find a convenient banner under which to seek office.

Posted by: Greg at 04:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 396 words, total size 2 kb.

You know, by stories about Sanford and Ensign and their affairs, speculation about Sarah Palin's resignation, and the Michael Jackson saga -- here's what the news media HASN'T been telling you about the conduct of the Democrat majority in Washington.

** Rep. John Conyers' (D-MI) wife Monica was convicted on bribery charges. An associate also implicated Rep. Conyers and Senator Stabenow (D-MI) in the crimes. The state-run media hasn't touched this.

** The jury in Rep. Jefferson's (D-LA)criminal case saw tape this week of him accepting bribes and were handed photos of his frozen cold cash this week.

** Mr. John Harris pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud this week. He pledged to cooporate with prosecutors in the investigation of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D-IL) in exchange for the lenient sentence.

** Criminal accusations against Senator Dodd (D-Conn.)continue. Dodd has not been straightforward about the value of his 10-acre waterfront home in Ireland. Since 2002 he listed the value of the home at $250,000. In February his office changed that to $127,000. In March, Dodd told The Hartford Current he paid $177,000 for the home. In May he told Newsweek he paid $207,000. Acording to the senator's most recent financial disclosure form, the cottage is actually worth $658,000.

** Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) has come under scrutiny as more defense contractors associated with him are being investigated. This time the names include Mountaintop Technologies which received $10 million in earmarks and Kuchera Industries which got $9 million in earmarks in 2008. The Pennsylvania representative allegedly used his seniority and position on the U.S. House Appropriations committee to secure the earmarks that he passed on to companies with whom he had relationships. Donations from executives of Mountaintop to Murtha's campaigns amounted to $40,200 while employees of Kuchera kicked in $89,000.

** Several members of the Congressional Black Caucus (Dems) are under investigation for taking an illegal trip to Cuba where these members sucked up to Fidel Castro.

** The House ethics committee opened an inquiry into whether Caribbean trips taken by Representative Charles Rangel violated House gift rules.

** Sen. Inouye (D-Hawaii) acts on behalf of a constituent, who turns out to be in large part himself (a troubled bank in which his ownership share makes up ‘the bulk of his personal wealth’), via Instapundit. The media is silent.

** The House so far has ignored Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. of Illinois over his reported effort to persuade ousted Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich to appoint him to fill President Obama's former Senate seat.

** And, there's also Speaker Pelosi who lied about her knowlege of waterboarding and then charged the CIA with lying.

Of course, why would you want to know about those things -- after all, Democrats brought Hope'N'Change to America, and anything that interferes with implementing the agenda of Barack Obama is unpatriotic, so we just have to let Democrat corruption slide.

Posted by: Greg at 03:29 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 497 words, total size 5 kb.

And why are we paying this much money for her staff?

The salaries for staffers in the Office of First Lady are also on the newest list. The highest paid is Chief of Staff Susan Sher, who gets the top $172,200. Here are the rest:

$140,000
Frye, Jocelyn C. (DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PROJECTS FOR THE FIRST LADY)

$113,000
Rogers, Desiree G. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND WHITE HOUSE SOCIAL SECRETARY)

$102,000
Johnston, Camille Y. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE FIRST LADY)
Winter, Melissa E. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)

$90,000
Medina, David S. (DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)

$84,000
Lelyveld, Catherine M. (DIRECTOR AND PRESS SECRETARY TO THE FIRST LADY)

$75,000
Starkey, Frances M. (DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULING AND ADVANCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)

$70,000
Sanders, Trooper (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PROJECTS FOR THE FIRST LADY)

$65,000
Burnough, Erinn J. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY SOCIAL SECRETARY)
Reinstein, Joseph B. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY SOCIAL SECRETARY)

$62,000
Goodman, Jennifer R. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULING AND EVENTS COORDINATOR FOR THE FIRST LADY)

$60,000
Fitts, Alan O. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ADVANCE AND TRIP DIRECTOR FOR THE FIRST LADY)
Lewis, Dana M. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT AND PERSONAL AIDE TO THE FIRST LADY)

$52,500
Mustaphi, Semonti M. (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY TO THE FIRST LADY)

$50,000
Jarvis, Kristen E. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR SCHEDULING AND TRAVELING AIDE TO THE FIRST LADY)

$45,000
Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)
Tubman, Samantha (DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,SOCIAL OFFICE)

$40,000
Boswell, Joseph J. (EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)

$36,000
Armbruster, Sally M. (STAFF ASSISTANT TO THE SOCIAL SECRETARY)
Bookey, Natalie (STAFF ASSISTANT)
Jackson, Deilia A. (DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)

Now I realize that the total expenditure of $1.6 million is a drop in the bucket as far as Barack Obama's trillion dollar deficits are concerned, but for an unelected spouse of an elected official to have such a taxpayer-supported staff reeks of royalty. And yes, I know that Mrs. Obama is not the first to have such a staff, but that makes it no more acceptable.

Of course, the Obama Regime refuses to tell us how much we taxpayers are spending to take Michelle and the kids on vacation trips and date nights (heck, even on ice cream runs -- personal rather than official travel) despite promises of openness and transparency, so I suppose we should be thankful for even being permitted this much insight into the excess expenditures of government.

Posted by: Greg at 09:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 453 words, total size 3 kb.

Fred Hiatt of the Washington Post points out this inconvenient truth about the need to "fatten the beast" in the Era of Hope'N'Change.

You cannot run a progressive government of the kind Obama favors by collecting only 18 percent of the gross domestic product in taxes, which has been the norm over the past 40 years. Nor can you increase the tax take to 24.5 percent of GDP -- which is what Obama proposes to be spending in 2019 -- simply by making the rich pay more.

And if you can't limit those tax increases to the super-rich making over $250,000. . . $200,000. . . $100,000 a year, then taxes are going to need to be raised somewhere. The only place left, of course, is the middle class -- you know, those of us making over $40,000 a year. The people who Obama swore would not see their taxes increased to pay for his programs.

Is this the Change you've been Hoping for?

More At Hot Air

Posted by: Greg at 02:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 1 kb.

Like everyone else, I'm still stunned by Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's surprise resignation announcement yesterday.

Not because I'm a saddened supporter -- I'm not. I think she was a good pick for VP, and a potential star for the future, but I don't think she is what the GOP needs right now. Rather, because the entire thing is so unexpected and inexplicable.

And as I began, like others (some of which appeared to be nothing more than a liberal echo chamber-- ), musing upon the possible reasons for this resignation, I was left quite confused. Is Palin doomed, I wondered?

Until I realized a possible reason for the resignation that requires looking beyond the immediate political landscape.

Sarah Palin is NOT running for President in 2012. She is going to run for Senator in 2010 -- and bide her time in that office until 2016 or 2020.

Think about it for a minute. Alaska's current GOP senator is not terribly popular in Alaska, and Sarah Palin could easily beat her in a primary -- and is popular enough in Alaska to win the general election handily. But to run as a sitting governor would be difficult for her -- first because she would be taking on an incumbent of her own party, and second because of the string of frivolous ethics complaints filed against her by her political enemies. But out of office, she is not taking time away from her job as governor and she can't be accused of using state resources to advance her candidacy.

Now secure in the US Senate for six years, the following become possible.

1. Palin develops a national record in Washington -- and racks up lots of political IOUs -- campaigning for the 2012 GOP ticket and assorted candidates around the country in 2012.
   
2. In the event that the GOP ticket loses in 2012, she is positioned as a successful Governor and Senator in 2016, when she would be the front-runner for the GOP nomination in a year when the GOP is quite likely to win the presidency after 8 years of Obama.
   
3. In the event the GOP ticket wins in 2012, Palin is a likely Cabinet pick -- perhaps Secretary of Energy, due to her experience with the field in Alaska. She then bides her time until 2020 -- when she will still be in her mid-50s and have a formidable resume among her GOP rivals.
   

Remember -- it took Ronald Reagan 12 years from the time he first looked at the presidency (196 to the time he won in 1980. Palin has a book deal, and she can fire up a crowd with her speeches -- and doesn't need a teleprompter, unlike a certain politician I could name.

My biggest hope, though, is that Mark Steyn is wrong about what Palin's move yesterday means -- namely, the definitive end of the age when an ordinary American can aspire to rise to the upper ranks of America's leadership because of the nature of contemporary politics and its impact upon the lives of those who "play the game".

National office will dwindle down to the unhealthily singleminded (Clinton, Obama), the timeserving emirs of Incumbistan (Biden, McCain) and dynastic heirs (Bush). Our loss.

This Independence Day, I hope America is better than that, and that we have not entered a day of elite government by narcissists, careerists, and dynasts -- for if we have, then yesterday's announcement signaled the death of the principles of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, which would mean that it was effectively the obituary of our nation.

I'll open the comments on this one.

Posted by: Greg at 03:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 630 words, total size 6 kb.