Obama Reverses Campaign Decision

In 2008, then candidate Obama claimed “Offshore drilling would not lower gas prices today,” he said. “It would not lower gas prices tomorrow. It would not lower gas prices this year. It would not lower gas prices five years from now." However, as noted here before, what candidate Obama said is not always what he delivers.

Have to give credit when credit is due. Today's decision to drill for oil off America's east coast comes as a pleasant surprise to those of us on the "drill, baby, drill" side of things. The administration failed to lift the ban on the Gulf of Mexico or the Pacific coast, but a step in the right direction is a step nonetheless. Now it will be interesting to see how the Democratic base reacts. First Read had this comment on the move:

The announcement is stunning for those of us who paid close attention to the presidential race. And it will be yet another test for Obama’s Democratic base -- in this case, environmentalists. As the New York Times writes, “But while Mr. Obama has staked out middle ground on other environmental matters -- supporting nuclear power, for example -- the sheer breadth of the offshore drilling decision will take some of his supporters aback.”

Verdict on ObamaCare

Last week, Chuck Todd of MSNBC stated that the poll numbers from the middle of this week would probably represent where they would stay heading into the 2010 elections. I thought this made sense at the time. A week after the bill passed people would have digested it as much as they were going to and opinions would have hardened to a sticking point. That said, this is what the newest USA Today/Gallup poll claims.

Nearly two-thirds of Americans say the health care overhaul signed into law last week costs too much and expands the government's role in health care too far, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, underscoring an uphill selling job ahead for President Obama and congressional Democrats. 

Those surveyed are inclined to fear that the massive legislation will increase their costs and hurt the quality of health care their families receive.

Looks like it is going to be a long election season for Democrats.

Obama's Reading List

New flash: Obama reverses track and pledges to follow Romney's lead!
Think he'll read it?

Obama and the Red States

 

Smart Politics analysizes President Obama's public statements and finds that he has spoken to foreign countries fours times more often than he has spoken to a large subset of those whom he represents. According to their study of the hundreds of speeches and public comments of the US President, 12% have been to foreign audiences, while less than three percent have been in a so-called red state.

63 % were speeches for blue states. What was that about bringing the country together? Maybe he meant Europe.

Europe Bemoans Obama's Success

No sooner had I submitted the previous post then I happened upon this article from Der Spiegel. It perfectly illustrates the previous point. Europe has for so long relied on a strong America to do all the heavy lifting in the world that it is now at a loss when a US president is behaving more like a European one. Emphasis mine:

The debate will dominate the next few months -- and will no doubt also have an impact on the other projects that Obama is finally planning to tackle. The attention that the president will have to continue to pay to health care, in fact, makes further successes that much more doubtful.

Every other issue has become a sideshow, particularly those outside the borders of America. The Afghanistan mission: of marginal interest. Protecting the environment: postponed. Peace in the Middle East: off in the distance. Sanctions against Iran: delayed. Europe: not even worth a trip. 

The one remaining global superpower has succumbed to navel gazing. The nature of Obama's hard-fought victory means little will change in the near future. On the contrary: Now he must explain to the country and to his own party why the entire health care journey, as all-encompassing as it turned out to be, was worth it in the end. He will have little time for anything else.

Such a realization should not spoil the celebration over health care for the Americans themselves. But the rest of the world won't be joining the party quite so enthusiastically.

America's Decline: Is It Inevitiable?

Read a fascinating if sobering article today by Mark Steyn. In it he posits the question of whether Americ is in decline, and if it is what kind. I urge you take take the time to read it as it is a bit too long to summarize here. Some highlights:

Is America set for decline? It’s been a grand run. The country’s been the leading economic power since it overtook Britain in the 1880s. That’s impressive. Nevertheless, over the course of that century and a quarter, Detroit went from the world’s industrial powerhouse to an urban wasteland, and the once golden state of California atrophied into a land of government run by the government for the government.  What happens when the policies that brought ruin to Detroit and sclerosis to California became the basis for the nation at large? Strictly on the numbers, the United States is in the express lane to Declinistan: Unsustainable entitlements, the remorseless governmentalization of the American economy and individual liberty, and a centralization of power that will cripple a nation of this size. Decline is the way to bet. But what will ensure it is if the American people accept decline as a price worth paying for European social democracy.

Make no doubt, there is a choice involved here, and many on the left seem to think decline will be OK. After all, look at much of Europe. They have all the trappings of modernity, relative wealth, culture, security and yet there are undeniably in decline when compared to their more glorious pasts. However, America's decline would be different for one important reason.

Why did decline prove so pleasant in Europe? Because it was cushioned by American power. The United States is such a perversely non-imperial power that it garrisons not ramshackle colonies but its wealthiest “allies”, from Germany to Japan. For most of its members, “the free world” has been a free ride. And that, too, is unprecedented. Even the few Nato members that can still project meaningful force around the world have been able to arrange their affairs on the assumption of the American security umbrella: In the United Kingdom, between 1951 and 1997 the proportion of expenditure on defense fell from 24 per cent to seven, while the proportion on health and welfare rose from 22 per cent to 53. And that’s before New Labour came along to widen the gap further. 

Those British numbers are a bald statement of reality: You can have Euro-sized entitlements or a global military, but not both. What’s easier to do if you’re a democratic government that’s made promises it can’t afford? Cut back on nanny-state lollipops? Or shrug off thankless military commitments for which the electorate has minimal appetite? A Continental might take the view that this is democracy’s safeguard against an old temptation. After all, declining powers frequently turned to war to arrest their own decline or another’s rise – see the Franco-Prussian, the Austro-Prussian, the Napoleonic Wars and many others. But those were the days when traditional great power rivalry was resolved on the battled. Today we have post-modern post-great power rivalry, in which America envies the way the beneficiaries of its post-war largesse have been able to opt out of the great game entirely. In reality-TV terms, the Great Satan would like to vote itself off the battlefield. On its present course, as Dennis Prager put it, America “will be a large Sweden, and just as influential as the smaller one.”

No one is going to be there to be the umbrella of protection for us while we age into a graceful ,yet powerless, version of our former selves. If America wants to remain relevant and free it must remain independent and powerful.

 

Taxes vs. Services

A Quinnipiac poll claims 84% of Americans say the middle class will have to make financial sacrifices to reduce the federal budget deficit, which is true. However, more than 75% oppose raising income taxes on the middle class or limiting the growth of Social Security and Medicare. You can't have your cake and eat it too. This is the problem with the Democratic party as currently constituted. They want to provide never ending and always expanding services solely on the backs of the "rich".  While Republicans are not perfect, at least they are willing to discuss cutting actual services that we can not pay for.

Obama's Non-Existent Bump

Last year, former President Clinton claimed that the minute health care reform passed, President Obama's approval ratings would go up 10 points.

However, the Gallup daily tracking poll still shows Obama's approval rate at 48%, essentially unchanged.

Hidden Costs of ObamaCare

Remember when Speaker Pelosi said we need to pass this bill to see what is in it? When President Obama said that once HRC became law and the public actually saw what the bill would do that we would like it? Well, now that ObamaCare is the law of the land more people are delving into exactly what it entails. Yes, there is some objective good in this bill, but at what cost?

The bill's stated cost is $938 billion over 10 years. But does that include the financial hit already taken by large companies across the nation, in this, just week one of ObamaCare? AT&T said it will take a $1 billion charge due to Obamacare. Earlier this week, Caterpillar took a $100 million writedown. Caterpillar provides generous drug benefits to retirees, largely due to tax-free subsidies; that program now will be taxed. Deere says it will take a $150 million hit, and AK Steel $31 million. If this is the blood drawn in week one, imagine the cumulative effects of a year. $938 billion seems like wishful thinking.

Aside from the simple market economy effects of this bill there is also an approximately 15 million pound gorilla in the room. Democrats are widely believed to be pushing for amnesty for illegals. Regardless of where you stand on this issue, adding another 15 million uninsured into the pool will jump the price tag of ObamaCare considerably.

But wait, isn't this bill supposed to be paid for by taxing the rich? They can afford it right? Well, yes and no. Everything has consequences. America has more millionaires per capita than just about every other nation, and all those people effect the economy. Trickle down economics has a bad name right now, but that doesn't mean it's core principles are in error.  According to a recent study ObamaCare will cost an extra $46,000 in taxes for a person who earns $1 million a year.  Of course that one million is really $500,000 after-tax. A $46k tax is basically 10%. In a world where everything is relative 10% is a huge chunk of income. This means $46,000 less will be spent on other items that lead to more jobs.

Democrats may have meant well when they passed this bill but they have grossly miscalculated both the short term and long term effects on our economy.

Are Republicans Crazy?

No. They are not. But if you read the mainstream media's take on some recent polling, combined with the threats by fringe elements on congressional members,  you'd be forgiven if that is the conclusion you came too.

A new Harris poll examined Americans' beliefs about Obama. Here are the ones making the rounds on cable news.  One in four Republicans thinks Obama "may be the Anti-Christ", and 40% think he is "doing many of the things that Hitler did".  It gets even crazier if you read all the results. However a poll taken in 2007 on views about President Bush was just as "crazy". It claimed that 35% of Democrats thought that Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance. So what does all this tell us? That you need to read the fine print.

The new Harris poll was conducted online, by people who self-selected to participate. Thus you have a data set akin to those who tend to post comments on online articles. Clearly not a cross section of any party or group. What you get are the most motivated, and usually angry, members of the fringe- both left and right.

So before you conclude either the Right or the Left is crazy, step back and see where that latest poll is trolling for data.

New 2012 Poll

For what its worth...

The Clarus Poll reports:

A new nonpartisan nationwide poll shows that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is currently the strongest GOP presidential candidate for the 2012 election. The poll also shows President Obama leading all potential Republican candidates, but by narrower margins than he did last August.

• Obama versus Romney: 45%/41%/14% (-4%)
• Obama versus Huckabee: 47%/39%/14% (-8%)
• Obama versus Jeb Bush: 49%/37%/15% (-12%)
• Obama versus Gingrich: 48%/36%/16% (-12%)
• Obama versus Palin: 52%/34%/14% (-18%)

ObamaCare to Raise Premiums

So much for the promise of "if you like your plan you can keep it." WSJ has a great editorial detailing what major companies, like Verison, are tell their employees about the new reforms. Here are some excerpts:

In an email titled "President Obama Signs Health Care Legislation" sent to all employees Tuesday night, the telecom giant warned that "we expect that Verizon's costs will increase in the short term."....

 Mr. Reed specifically cited a change in the tax treatment of retiree health benefits....

The new bill might cause some to drop retiree coverage altogether. Others may be bound by labor contracts to retirees, but then they will find other ways to cut costs. This means raising costs or reducing coverage for other employees. So much for Mr. Obama's claim that if you like your coverage, you can keep it—even at Fortune 500 companies.

In its employee note, Verizon also warned about the 40% tax on high-end health plans, though that won't take effect until 2018. "Many of the plans that Verizon offers to employees and retirees are projected to have costs above the threshold in the legislation and will be subject to the 40 percent excise tax." These costs will start to show up soon, and, as we repeatedly argued, the tax is unlikely to drive down costs. The tax burden will simply be spread to all workers—the result of the White House's too-clever decision to tax insurers, rather than individuals.

Public Option Part Deux?

Huffington Post: "Democratic leadership no longer has to worry that additional amendments would send it back to the House, since it must return to the lower chamber regardless. The Senate is now free to put to the test that much-debated question of whether 50 votes exist for a public option. Democrats could also elect to expand Medicare or Medicaid, now that they only need 50 votes in the Senate and the approval of the House."

Transition Has Been The Plan All Along

This is why Republicans want to repeal this reform. It is not just what it does today; it is the direction it points us towards. Think of the U.S. as an oil tanker, in order to turn it in a different direction you have to start well before the intended turn location. It is a slow and hard to reverse process. Obama has just begun to turn the tanker toward a single-payer government run system.

GOP Should Challenge HCR Bill

A  CBS News poll that came out today states that 62% of Americans want Republicans to keep challenging the HCR bill. "Nearly nine in ten Republicans and two in three independents want the GOP to keep challenging. Even 41% of Democrats support continued challenges."

 The current meme is that the GOP can't repeal the bill as much of what will initially be instated has popular support....but then again...

A Brief Read on HCR

One of the blogs I frequent is Greg Mankiw's economics site. He recently explained his views on the ever-present health care reform debate and I thought they may be of interest to readers here:

Arthur Okun said the big tradeoff in economics is between equality and efficiency. The health reform bill offers more equality (expanded insurance, more redistribution) and less efficiency (higher marginal tax rates). Whether you think this is a good or bad choice to make, it should not be hard to see the other point of view.

I like to think of the big tradeoff as being between community and liberty. From this perspective, the health reform bill offers more community (all Americans get health insurance, regulated by a centralized authority) and less liberty (insurance mandates, higher taxes). Once again, regardless of whether you are more communitarian or libertarian, a reasonable person should be able to understand the opposite vantage point.

In the end, while I understood the arguments in favor of the bill, I could not support it. In part, that is because I am generally more of a libertarian than a communitarian. In addition, I could not help but fear that the legislation will add to the fiscal burden we are leaving to future generations.

This pretty well sums up my own view. I do not think many of the Democrats who pushed for this reform are evil people out to take over the country in some Machiavellian scheme. I think they honestly are doing what they think is best for the nation. They just happen to be very, very wrong.

While I encourage those on the right to use this bill as a rallying cry for more limited government in the future, I hope that some of the displays of hatred over the past few days fade into the background. Name calling and blind rage get us nowhere.

Pelosi's ideal Economy

Last night, Nancy Pelosi told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow about her ideal economy where artists and poets can express themselves without having to worry about keeping their day jobs in order to have health care benefits. The clip is below but here is the transcript:

    NANCY PELOSI: Think of an economy where people could be an artist or a photographer or a writer without worrying about keeping their day job in order to have health insurance or that people could start a business and be entrepreneurial and take risk, but not job loss because of a child with asthma or someone in the family is bipolar—you name it, any condition—is job locking.

Ok, I get her point, sort of. However, if you are trying to convince a skeptical public that the $1 trillion health care take over you just passed is good for the nation you probably shouldn't frame it this way. She is basically saying “ go ahead- do whatever your heart desires and don't worry about having any personal responsibility. The American tax payer will cover for you.”

This is insulting to the rest of us who actually have jobs. I know everyone on the left is crowing that she is the greatest speaker ever- but Democrats could do so much better. She just comes across as crazy to most of middle America.

Do We Have Enough Doctors?

A study reported on the New England Journal of Medicine Web site showed that 46 percent of physicians surveyed said they would be more likely to quit medicine or retire early if the bill passed. 30 million people are now going to be visiting a doctor regularly with their new insurance plans. 

Does anyone else see a problem?

Will we suddenly start graduating thousands of more doctors, who theoretically could be less rigorously screened by a desperate hiring committee? Will non-doctors start doing jobs previously done only by doctors? Will procedures start being rationed due to lack of qualified providers? I don't have the answers, just asking the questions.

A Frightening 90 Seconds

HCR Passes

I was debating whether to post anything today or not. With the abundance of punditry from all angles there really didn't seem much to say. There are some individual items in this package that I think are actually good, but the question is whether the government can sustain it without bankrupting us as a nation.

In my own trolling through the commentaries on TV and print I heard one person say how what Obama was doing was changing the overall direction of the U.S.. That he was turning the tanker and pointing it in a new direction. That the details, or process, were unimportant to him or his supporters. What was important was turning towards a new activist role for the government. I can't remember who said it, but it rings true. And that is what bothers me most of all.

R.I.P. Daniel Boone

I was born in the wrong decade. As a member of Generation X I have always felt more affinity for the 1950's and 60's than my own 80's in terms of culture, style and entertainment, which is why the news of Fess Parker's  death yesterday was depressing.

Parker was was an American film and television actor best known for his 1950s portrayals of Davy Crockett for Walt Disney and his late 1960s portrayals of Daniel Boone.  He was also known as a wine maker and resort owner-operator. Less well know was his support and friendship with Ronald Regan. Parker once represented the President in Australia and was for a time considered for the post of ambassador to that country under President Regan.

Rest In Peace.

Great Question..

...Wish I Had a Better Answer!

A reader recently asked the following:

I stumbled upon your blog and seem to share many of your political sentiments.  I am an Obama supporter, but mainly because the Democrats (especially Obama) seem to be the only ones having serious rational debates.... I truly believe that there is room for a moderate Republican reemergence (and when Obama is out of office there will be a need for one).  I was wondering if you were aware of any such movements, organizations, or candidates I could get in contact with or support.

Unfortunately for those of us on the center-right it can be difficult to find people and organizations to truly stand behind. There are a couple of organizations that come to mind. The first is The Republican  Main Street Partnership. This is a group of Senators, Congressmen and other officials who, while Republican, tend to lean towards the center. Another group is Republicans United. They are a blog and civic group who stand behind the effort to open the Republican Party to the entire spectrum of the American Center-Right. I occasionally cross-post at their blog and encourage readers to give it a look.

As for candidates, I know it is cliche at the moment, but Scott Brown, the newly elected senator from MA is a solidly centrist Republican. While his historic win is still reverberating throughout Washington he will be up for re-election in less than two years and will need all the help he can get in Massachusetts. National candidates are harder to find. While not ideal, Mitt Romney is probably the closet thing we have to a centrist Republican on the national stage. He tried to remake himself into a cultural warrior-hard right candidate last cycle, but speaking as a resident of MA where he was once governor, I can say that he is more centrist than he lets on.

If any regular readers can add to this list please do!

Is The US Turning into Bourbon France?

The U.S could be broke and in dangerous decline according to the Joint Operating Environment 2010 report released by the U.S. military. Here is the money quote:

The foregoing issues of trade imbalance and government debt have historic precedents that bode ill for future force planners. Habsburg Spain defaulted on its debt some 14 times in 150 years and was staggered by high inflation until its overseas empire collapsed. Bourbon France became so beset by debt due to its many wars and extravagances that by 1788 the contributing social stresses resulted in its overthrow by revolution. Interest ate up 44% of the British Government budget during the interwar years 1919-1939, inhibiting its ability to rearm against a resurgent Germany. Unless current trends are reversed, the U.S. will face similar challenges, anticipating an ever-growing percentage of the U.S. government budget going to pay interest on the money borrowed to finance our deficit spending.

When exactly will our government start taking debt reduction seriously. Kicking this can continuously down the road only makes it worse. Eventually some politicians are going to need to sacrifice (their electability?) in order to make the hard decisions necessary to fix this situation.

Health Care Hyperbole

Politics are getting in the way of health care reform? How about basic facts. Every politician is allowed the use of some hyperbole when addressing a crowd of supporters- I get that. But Obama claims in this speech that health care premiums could go down as much as 3000%. That doesn't even make sense.

If you pay $5,000 a year for health insurance through your employer, a 3000% drop would mean your health care provider would have to pay you $145,000. Well, if that is the Democrat's plan, then sign me up!

Tea Part Move Over

And we thought our activists were pushing the envelope!Associated Press:

BANGKOK — Thai protesters seeking a change of government turned to shock tactics Tuesday, pouring gallons of their own blood into a glistening puddle at the gate of the prime minister's office.
The dramatic gesture, repeated in front of the headquarters of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiava's Democrat Party, grabbed attention but put the "Red Shirt" protest movement no closer to its goal of forcing new elections.

Obama, Education and Parental Responsibilities

The problem with the public schools is they can only be as good as the public they serve.- Rod Dreher

President Obama's plan to drastically change the 2002 No Child Left Behind education law is, not surprisingly, getting mixed reviews across the board: Teachers unions complained that its members are being scapegoated; a school board leader praised it but demanded greater flexibility; and some are just happy to see the underfunded mandate of NCLB go away.

However, as President Obama opens discussions on how to rework the No Child Left Behind it is useful to discuss the limitations of public schools in modern America. The above quote from Mr. Dreher is illustrative as to the reality many public school teachers face. While no one (myself included- and I am a teacher) is going to defend poor teaching, bad schools or overly defensive and often obstructionist teachers unions, the reality is that there is only so much schools can do. 

Many kids come to school from such dysfunctional homes that if they make it to school with their shoes tied, it's a miracle. How in the world can schools teach these kids when most of their time is taken up with social work. A teacher is not a parent, but more and more society expects teachers to be both things. Hillary Clinton famously stated that it takes a village to raise a child, and unfortunately that meme has stuck- when in fact it is patently false.

It does not take a village, it takes parents who place a value on their job as parents.  Today we have sites, such as MomsRising.org that purport to "share a common concern about the need to build a more family-friendly America." Yet at the same time they foster the idea that more government intervention is a better option than an involved parent. Here is an excerpt from a recent article on this site:

“My husband and I have to work opposite shifts because child care is unaffordable. He works from 6am to 2:30pm, and I have to meet my husband at his job to drop off our son so that I can be to work by 3:00pm. I miss out on putting my son to bed.” – Kristina, MomsRising Member

Unfortunately, Kristina’s story is not unique. In today’s economy, we hear story after story of parents struggling to find and afford quality child care and preschool. Today we have a chance to do something about it.

So, what is the solution? Should the family downsize and make some sacrifices in order to allow one parent to stay home or work part time? No, according to Moms Rising, President Obama needs to step in the fund more early childhood education.

You see, the President’s proposed budget includes significant new investments in programs that help families access affordable, high-quality child care, and early education programs. So now we need to make sure Congress knows that the proposed increased investments in the President’s budget are critical for families.

 Believe me, I feel for families forced to work many jobs and unfortunate hours to make ends meet. I am not judging Kristina or those like her. But as a society should our first response to situations like this be to look to the government? It is this "it takes a village" mentality that makes our teachers into a social worker-teacher-nanny-parent. Tis is a job no one can do well.

Wisconsin Pick-up?

A new Wisconsin Policy Research Institute poll shows Tommy Thompson (R) leading Sen. Russ Feingold (D) in a possible U.S. Senate match up, 51% to 39%.

I am sure the Supreme Courts ruling against McCain-Feingold isn't helping Russ' standing any either.

Specter Beating Toomey

A new DailyKos/Research 2000 poll in Pennsylvania finds Sen. Arlen Specter (D) leading Pat Toomey (R), 47% to 41%.

In a Democratic primary, Specter is still way ahead of Rep. Joe Sestak (D),  51% to 32%.

Last week a Quinnipiac poll also found Specter leading Toomey.

All those purist who chased Specter out better hope Toomey is able to win come November.

Did The Senate Parlimentarian Kill Health care?

The Senate parliamentarian’s ruling that President Obama would have to sign the Senate bill before reconciliation could be used may have spelled the end of this year long debate.. This puts Nancy Pelosi in a real bind. It would require House members to trust in the U.S. Senate, something they have been reluctant to do as recent history has shown they can't. Now they can't get an abortion fix done to attract enough of Stupak's group to get this passed.  

Firedoglake has a whip count of 189 firm yes, 202 firm no. 

Michael Barone thinks it is dead. 

Democrats have now spent a year trying to push Obamacare, as the public has moved further and further away from it. 85% of the country is happy with their health care. While spending all this time on HCR, the economy has been ignored. Did you notice how the president said he was going to focus like a laser on jobs in his State of The Union speech? Well, what happened?

The Democrats are beginning to look incompetent. They had their chance- all the stars were aligned. As of today it certainly looks like they have failed.

Email List

Laura Ingraham has a call list on her websiteof Democrats who voted "No" on health care reform last year but may vote "Yes" this time around. The list is below.
DC office numbers and links to office e-mails:

John Adler, N.J.
202-225- 4765
EMAIL

Jason Altmire, Pa.
202-225- 2565
EMAIL

Brian Baird, Wash.
202-225-3536
EMAIL

John Barrow, Ga.
202-225-2823
EMAIL

John Boccieri, Ohio
202-225-3876
EMAIL

Rick Boucher, Va.
202-225-3861
EMAIL

Ben Chandler, Ky.
202-225-4706
EMAIL

Lincoln Davis, Tenn.
202-225- 6831
EMAIL

Bart Gordon, Tenn.
202-225-4231
EMAIL

Tim Holden, Pa.
202-225- 5546
EMAIL (Must be a constituent)

Suzanne Kosmas, Fla
202-225-2706.
EMAIL

Betsy Markey, Colo.
202-225-4676
EMAIL (Must be a constituent)

Jim Matheson, Utah
202-225-3011
EMAIL

Scott Murphy, N.Y.
202-225-5614
EMAIL

Glenn Nye, Va.
202-225-4215
EMAIL (Must be a constituent)

Ike Skelton, Mo.
202-225-2876
EMAIL (Must be a constituent)

Richard Hanna: Republican Candidate in New York’s 24th District

I don't know much about Mr. Hanna, but I respect Stuart Rothenberg's opinion. So when he titles and article on Hana  The Most Refreshing, Yet Unusual, Candidate Interview I’ve Done, I am interested.
Here are some highlights:

Here are some of the things Richard Hanna, the 2008 Republican nominee for Congress and a 2010 hopeful, said during that interview:

“I never really thought of myself as a Republican. I still don’t.”

“I don’t live in a world where ideology helps you. I live in a world of practical solutions.”

Would he like Sarah Palin to campaign for him? “No,” he said, smiling. “She seems like a nice lady, but that’s not me.”

When asked about Republican Capitol Hill enthusiasm for his rematch against Arcuri: “It’s nice they are excited about my race, but they may be disappointed when I get here.”

And, finally, when I asked him whether he would commit to supporting House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) for Speaker if the GOP wins back the House, he looked incredulous. “No,” he responded. “I don’t know him. I would need to meet him.”

Sounds more like an Independent at this point, but wait-

On cultural issues, he definitely differs with many of his Republican supporters, since he supports abortion rights and civil unions for gays, and he thinks “don’t ask, don’t tell” should be reversed.

But on other issues, he is conservative, opposing the stimulus bill (for stimulating the growth of government, not creating jobs), the public insurance option and an insurance mandate in health care reform, and cap-and-trade.

The clincher for me:

My “b.s. meter” didn’t go off even once. Many of the candidates I’ve interviewed over the past five years have called themselves independent and portrayed themselves as outsiders, but their answers to my questions told a different story. That’s where Hanna is different.

Again, I do not know any more about Mr Hanna than what I have read in this article, but I will be interested to follow this race in upstate NY this Fall.

 

New Hampshire Republican Hopefuls

Looks like New Hampshire should be able to keep one of its Senate seats in the red. And of course Mike Castle looks very strong in Delaware. While I know many conservatives have issues with Collins and Snowe, having Republican Senators from DE, MA, NH & ME tells us something. New England Republicans are not an extinct species after all.

Rasmussen New Hampshire Senatorial Survey:

* Kelly Ayotte (R) 47% {46%} [49%] (46%)
* Paul Hodes (D) 37% {39%} [40%] (38%)

* Bill Binnie (R) 46% {42%} [37%]
* Paul Hodes (D) 36% {41%} [43%]

* Paul Hodes (D) 42% {44%} [45%]
* Ovide Lamontagne (R) 38% {38%} [38%]

Book Sales and Presidential Candidates

Mitt Romney's new book, No Apology: The Case for American Greatness, will debut on top of the New York Times bestseller list due out March 21, according to Ben Smith. However, I am sure it will not end up outselling Sarah Palin's Going Rogue . 

Do book sales mean anything in terms of political viability?  My guess is probably not.

New Video: Lessons From Sweden

Sweden makes for a good object lesson in the importance of public policy. They became rich between 1870 and 1970 when government was very small, but then began to stagnate as welfare state policies were implemented in the 1970s and 1980s. This video explains how Sweden is now turning back to economic freedom in order to reverse the damage caused by an excessive welfare state.

See Featured Video to the left to view.

Health Care Whip Count

For those interested in some inside baseball Hot Line has an interesting read.

Dems are aiming to pass health care legislation, once and for all, by Easter recess. But for all their optimistic talk, one thing remains clear: They don't have the votes just yet. Then again, they don't have a bill yet, either.

The first step of what promises to be an arduous process will come when Dem leaders unveil the package of proposed measures to fix the legislation and make it more palatable to some House lawmakers. Once the Senate demonstrates it is able to pass the bill via reconciliation, the House will vote on the Senate legislation.

Still, the math for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Maj. Leader Steny Hoyer and House Maj. Whip James Clyburn isn't adding up at the moment. In order to keep an ongoing tally, Hotline OnCall brings you our whip count, the list of Dems who may be vulnerable to overtures from Dem leaders and the WH -- or to overtures from GOPers who continue to believe they can defeat the bill.

To read the list CLICK HERE.

HRC: Members in Play

With the public solidly against the Democrat's version of health care, congress is nonetheless soldiering on.  Regardless of your position on health care reform at this point the number of congressional members in play is decidedly small. A couple dozen members, from all four corners of the US will basically decide whether the president's signature domestic policy issue lives or dies. Matt Lewis over at the Daily Caller lists the following congressmen as the pivotoal players in the fastly evolving health care debate. First there are the prolife Democrats:

Stupak’s bloc includes Rep. Joseph Cao (La.), the lone Republican who voted for the bill. The remaining dozen Democrats include Reps. Dale Kildee (Mich.), Jim Oberstar (Minn.), Charlie Wilson (Ohio), Dennis Cardoza (Calif.), Marcy Kaptur (Ohio), Bill Foster (Ill.), Dan Lipinski (Ill.), Kathy Dahlkemper (Pa.), Jerry Costello (Ill.), Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Chris Carney (Pa.), and Solomon Ortiz (Texas). Because this is a bloc of 14 votes, it is hard to imagine a scenario where health care could pass if this bloc votes no.

Next come the Democrats representing conservative districts:

Democrats also risk losing seven members who voted for the bill, but have since became displeased with the handling of the health care bill—or have come under pressure from voters in their conservative districts to oppose it. Members of this list include Reps. Michael Arcuri (N.Y.), Marion Berry (Ark.), Steve Driehaus (Ohio), Brad Ellsworth (Ind.), Ann Kirkpatrick (Ariz.), Earl Pomeroy (N.D.). While these members were willing to risk voting for health care last year, as Election Day approaches, their willingness to take unpopular stances for the sake of their president may diminish.

Finally, they are the Democrats who previously voted "no" but are now facing some serious arm twisting from leadership:

This list of possible vote-switchers includes Reps. John Adler (N.J.), Betsy Markey (Colo.), Bart Gordon (Tenn.), Allen Boyd (Fla.), Jason Altmire (Pa.), Frank Kratovil (Md.), Brian Baird (Wash.), John Barrow (Ga.), John Boccieri (Ohio), John Tanner (Tenn.), Glenn Nye (Va.), Rick Boucher (Va.), Larry Kissell (N.C.), Suzanne Kosmas (Fla.), Michael McMahon (N.Y.), and Scott Murphy (N.Y.). Making matters worse, many of these members are retiring and, thus, can vote for Obamacare without having to worry about standing before the voters.

The ball is entirely in the Democrat's hands at this point.

Deficit by 2020

A picture says a thousand words....

Romney 2012...I Hope

I am re-posting in full an article by Chuck Davis for the Des Moines Iowa Register. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Regarding President Barack Obama's approval ratings dropping: We now see what happens when people vote based on emotion instead of logic.

Obama became president because fiscal conservatives and moderates were frustrated with George W. Bush acting like a Democrat in his spending on social programs. Moderates on both sides of the political aisle were frustrated with Bush's apparent lack of any meaningful effort to win the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - as well as his gun-slinger, arrogant swagger.

Along came a black man with charisma who did an absolutely great job of delivering a Teleprompter speech. This gave white independents and some moderate Republicans a chance to soothe their souls by being able to claim, "See, I am not racist. I voted for a black man to be president."

People did not seem to care that, other than being a community organizer, Obama had virtually no meaningful experience in administration or leadership.

Too many voters glamorized and romanticized Obama. They believed him when he spoke of transparency and bipartisan leadership. They believed him when he said he would bring our troops home.

Had Republicans set aside their problem with Mitt Romney's religion, I have no doubt we would now have a president leading our nation with honesty and integrity, who actually understands fiscal responsibility and who has a track record of fixing institutions that are broken.

 If only.....

Weekend Book Review: John Gray's "Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia"

In Gray's book his first line says it all "Modern politics is a chapter in the history of religion." He argues that the modern urge to create a Utopia is nothing more and a secular religious impulse. From Publishers Weekly:

Some readers will see pessimism where others see sober appraisal in Gray's antiutopian argument that we must reconcile ourselves to a world of multiple truths and incompatible freedoms, where there is no overarching meaning and human values and desires can never be fully harmonized. The views that history progresses toward perfection and the millenarian faith in human salvation—both rooted in abiding Christian myths—are as tenacious as they have proven destructive, the renowned British political theorist and critic argues. Building succinctly on arguments developed in his previous work (including Two Faces of Liberalism and Al Qaeda and What It Means to Be Modern), Gray traces the course of apocalyptic-utopian politics from early Christianity through its secular variant in the Enlightenment and into modern political thought from Marx to Francis Fukuyama, the French Revolution to radical Islamism. Centrally, he assails the contemporary American right (and staunch neoconservative fellow traveler Tony Blair), which after 9/11 advanced into the mainstream the utopianism previously confined to the extreme right and left. His eloquent and illuminating attack also challenges a notion common to the liberal establishment: that history moves inexorably toward the universal application of U.S.-style liberal democracy. He calls it a delusional article of faith that, like the utopian variants before it, easily justifies violence in the name of a greater destiny.

It is an interesting premise if at the same time a depressing one. 

The Progressives of the early 20th century, from their evil incarnations as the Nazi Party and Soviet-style Communists to the more benign Wilsonian Liberals, the impulse to remake society and create an ideal world was strong. Later in the 60's, here in the US we had the birth of the New Left, which included activists, educators, agitators and others wanting to bring about a broad range of reforms, in contrast to earlier leftist or Marxist movements that had focused mostly on labor unions and questions of social class. 

Today, if people are honest with themselves the Tea Party is taking it's place in this long tradition. The impulse is that is we could only get rid of this evil institution, and those evil people, then the natural goodness of The People will manifest itself, and all will be well with the world. This is Kingdom of God as politics.

But is Utopia possible? I am not sure I buy Gray's premise, but it certainly makes one think.

Friday's Good News and Bad News

Let's start with the good news.  The unemployment rate held steady at 9.7%, better than the 9.8% rate economists expected. On that news The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose for a second session in a row, rising 122.06 points, or 1.2%, to 10566.20, its best one-day gain in both point and percentage terms since Feb. 16. The micro-economy may be starting to rebound, which is really good news.

However, the macro-economy is not looking too bright. From The Hill, emphasis mine:

The United States in 2020 will owe to creditors almost as much as it produces as an economy, and interest on the national debt will grow to almost $1 trillion, according to an analysis of President Obama’s budget released Friday afternoon by the Congressional Budget Office.

The U.S. also, under the president’s budget, would spend an average of about 25 percent of what it produces each year. The U.S., until the last few years of former President George W. Bush’s time in office, has traditionally spent about 20 percent of its gross domestic product.

The national debt will grow from its current level of about $7.5 trillion, which is 53 percent of GDP, to $20.3 trillion, which is 90 percent of GDP, by 2020, the CBO numbers said, adding that the interest the U.S. will have to pay on that debt will “more than quadruple” in that time.

Harry Reid = Tone Deaf

He should really stop talking now....
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) took to the Senate floor this morning to discuss the latest jobs reports and says, "Today is a big day in America. Only 36,000 people lost their jobs today... which is really, really good."

Scott Borwn, Mr. 41

Of course Sen. Brown does have more than just HCR on his mind, but Democrats put a stop to that. They voted Thursday to defeat the first piece of legislation he offered.

The Senate voted 56 to 44 to kill an amendment he proposed that would have used $80 billion in unobligated stimulus funds to pay for a tax cut for 130 million people in the workforce.

Tea Party: If At First You Don't Succeed...

...try, try again. Since Democrats in Congress clearly did not get the idea over the Summer recess the Tea party is planing another round of protests his spring. From The Daily Caller:

Democrats are racing the clock to pass health care reform ahead of a wave of Tea Party-driven town hall meetings planned for the spring recess — the kind of gatherings that nearly derailed the package last August.

But there’s a big difference this time around. Last summer, Democrats were encouraged to hold the town hall meetings, and they were blindsided by the backlash, which was recorded and promoted in countless YouTube clips. This time around, they have a good idea of what’s coming — and they’re lying low, in case work on health care carries over into the recess.

Good Grief!

According to CBS13 California state senator Roy Ashburn (R) "was arrested for allegedly driving drunk after leaving Faces, a gay nightclub in midtown Sacramento, early Wednesday morning."

"A male passenger, who was not identified as a lawmaker, was also in the car but was not detained... Ashburn, a father of four, is a Republican Senator... with a history of opposing gay rights." 

Two words:

TERM LIMITS

Retirees, Benefits and Our Future

Retirees are living almost twice as long as they used to, which is good. Expecting the government (read the still-working) to support them for twice as long is bad. While getting out of social security what you put into it is certainly fair, 20+ years of income is exceeding what we can afford. 

Hopefully this problem will stop being kicked down the line to the next administration. It is a problem that needs attention. Now.

Blue Dogs & Balanced Budgets

 On Tuesday Blue Dog Democrats introduced legislation to add a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution. Give them credit for trying. Even if this is largely an election year ploy, any moderating influence within the Democratic Party that pushed away from out of control spending and towards fiscal restraint is a positive. From The Hill:

The legislation would require the federal government to pay down the national debt — which is over $12 trillion — and balance the budget by 2020. This year’s budget deficit is projected to be $1.6 trillion.

The 52-member Blue Dog Coalition is fresh off a victory it had spent it nearly two decades in existence fighting for — a law requiring Congress to offset any new, non-emergency expenditures with either tax increases or other spending cuts.

But many of those same Blue Dogs are once again unhappy over the lack of offsets in the Senate-passed $15 billion jobs bill, and as a result they’re withholding their support.  

New Featured Video: The 4 Minute Guide to the Seven-Hour Summit

The Heritage Foundation created a succinct four minute video that tells the story of the Historic 7 hour summit on Heath care Reform last week. Needless to say there are more lowlights than highlights.

Romney & Obama: 2 Visions of America's Place in the World

Obama as post-American president

Last week at CPAC John Bolton, a Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute  and a member of numerous presidential administrations, said of Obama, “He is the first post-American president.” According to Bolton Obama views America's superpower status as ending, or ended.  He claims Obama is fine letting America be a nation among the nations, not exceptional, certainly not better.

“He sees American decline as a kind of natural phenomenon,” Bolton stated.

Romney on American Exceptionalism

On the other hand we have Mitt Romney currently make the book tour rounds promoting his new tome  No Apology: The Case for American Greatness. It makes for an interesting juxtaposition. When Obama addressed the European nations,  he felt it necessary to apologize for America’s strength.  He repeated the apology in Latin America, and again to the Islamic world in an interview for Al-Arabiya television.

In No Apology,  Romney makes the case that American strength is essential for our own well-being, and for the world’s.

It should come as no surprise when The Moderate Republican stands on this issue.

Obama Claims Republican Ideas to be Included in HCR

In a letter to congressional leaders Obama said he will incorporate Republican suggestions on medical malpractice reform and trying to rid the health care system of waste and abuse in a revised proposal for HCR. Here is an exceprt from the letter:

1. Although the proposal I released last week included a comprehensive set of initiatives to combat fraud, waste, and abuse, Senator Coburn had an interesting suggestion that we engage medical professionals to conduct random undercover investigations of health care providers that receive reimbursements from Medicare, Medicaid, and other Federal programs.

2. My proposal also included a provision from the Senate health reform bill that authorizes funding to states for demonstrations of alternatives to resolving medical malpractice disputes, including health courts. Last Thursday, we discussed the provision in the bills cosponsored by Senators Coburn and Burr and Representatives Ryan and Nunes (S. 1099) that provides a similar program of grants to states for demonstration projects. Senator Enzi offered a similar proposal in a health insurance reform bill he sponsored in the last Congress. As we discussed, my Administration is already moving forward in funding demonstration projects through the Department of Health and Human Services, and Secretary Sebelius will be awarding $23 million for these grants in the near future. However, in order to advance our shared interest in incentivizing states to explore what works in this arena, I am open to including an appropriation of $50 million in my proposal for additional grants. Currently there is only an authorization, which does not guarantee that the grants will be funded.

3. At the meeting, Senator Grassley raised a concern, shared by many Democrats, that Medicaid reimbursements to doctors are inadequate in many states, and that if Medicaid is expanded to cover more people, we should consider increasing doctor reimbursement. I'm open to exploring ways to address this issue in a fiscally responsible manner.

4. Senator Barrasso raised a suggestion that we expand Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). I know many Republicans believe that HSAs, when used in conjunction with high-deductible health plans, are a good vehicle to encourage more cost-consciousness in consumers' use of health care services. I believe that high-deductible health plans could be offered in the exchange under my proposal, and I'm open to including language to ensure that is clear. This could help to encourage more people to take advantage of HSAs.

Is this enough of a compromise to call the bill bipartisan? I certainly don't think so.

So Much for Rewriting the Political Map

There was a lot of talk about how the nation was becoming blue (D) with a regional red (R) in the south. While Obama did exceptionally well in 2008, talk of a permanent color change may have been premature. According to Tom Jensen at Public Policy Polling the map is already shifting back.

Barack Obama now has a negative approval rating in every state he flipped from the Bush column to his in 2008. In each of those places his level of support is now in the 44-46% range. It's probably a good thing he doesn't have to run for reelection this year.

Health Care or Bust

Does the Democratically led Congress believe so strongly in moving The U.S. closer to a European-style Socialist democracy that they are willing to fall on their swords to further the cause? At least one prominent Dem seems to say that. Pelosi was clear the health-care reform bill must pass, no matter the consequences:

Pelosi urged her colleagues to back a major overhaul of U.S. health care even if it threatens their political careers, a call to arms that underscores the issue’s massive role in this election year.  

Lawmakers sometimes must enact policies that, even if unpopular at the moment, will help the public, Pelosi said in an interview being broadcast Sunday the ABC News program “This Week.”

“We’re not here just to self-perpetuate our service in Congress,” she said. “We’re here to do the job for the American people.”

Does doing the job for the American people mean passing bills that do not have popular support, and are in fact vehemently opposed by large swaths of America?  You can almost hear her say it "Just shut up we know whats best for you."

Of course if they can't pass this bill what does it say about Democrats in general? When you have majorities in both the House and the Senate you should be able to pass your President's signature domestic policy initiative shouldn't you? Maybe this just proves the dictum that Democrats can't govern.