Nancy Pelosi and the far left have decided that gaining control of our health care system must be done at any cost. Promises be damned.
Both Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi promised there would be transparency during the health care debate. Pelosi assumed the Speakers role while promising to work at “restoring accountability and openness.” She also promised “ample time” for the public to learn what is in the health care bill. Don’t hold your breath.
The mallet is for bashing heads
At a 2008 debate, Obama said that a potential health care bill would not be negotiated “behind closed doors, but bringing all parties together, and broadcasting those negotiations on C-Span so the American people can see what the choices are.” He lied on all accounts. Democrats are negotiating behind closed doors, will subvert the normal legislative process, and have cut out Republicans. Meanwhile, the CEO of C-Span wrote a letter, thus far to no avail, asking these leaders to live up to their promises by having the process televised.
Faced with this reality, Nancy Pelosi put on her best Baghdad Bob impression and declared, “there has never been a more open process for any legislation.” Au contraire! There has never been a bigger liar serving as Speaker of the House, nor President of the United States.
Comments
Print This Post
We need to “pitch in” more:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) endorsed the idea of a “global” tax on stock trades and other financial transactions, saying the estimated $150 billion in annual revenue from such a tax could be used to help fund more stimulus spending.
At her weekly press briefing on Thursday, Pelosi said the financial transactions tax (HR4191) currently before Congress would have to be made “global” to keep U.S. investors from taking their business overseas and out of taxable reach.
…Pelosi said she thought the idea might have currency among a public eager to see Wall Street firms “pitching in” to help the government grow the economy.
“I think there would be a market for it among the American people to say that we are all participating in the economic prosperity of our country, and we are all pitching in to continue that prosperity,” said Pelosi.
Nancy Pelosi’s view of society and the economy is gloriously and unabashedly foolish.
Let me get this straight: we need to tax productive financial transactions and give that money to a cadre of bureaucrats and politicos, who will then waste it various and sundry ways, in order to be prosperous. No.
Taxes are not how we contribute to prosperity. We contribute to prosperity by producing, and taxes are a burden on production. Nancy Pelosi has it exactly backwards.
Comments Print This Post
The jobless rate is currently at 10% (or higher if you count the discouraged), so clearly we need a little government job promotion, right? Barack Obama thinks so, and is set to unveil his latest “plan.” But not so fast! Haven’t we done this before?
This will be the third time government has acted to “create jobs” since the beginning of 2008. Why should we believe it will be any more successful now than it has been in the past?
In early 2008, President Bush teamed up with Nancy Pelosi to pass a $150 billion (then considered a lot of money) stimulus package. This “booster shot” to the economy, consisting primarily of rebates to individual taxpayers, was supposed to head off recession. At the time, the unemployment rate was under 5%.
A year later, Pelosi found herself with a new dancing partner in Barack Obama. President Obama’s subsequent stimulus package dwarfed that of President Bush. Passed when the unemployment rate was not yet 8%, it was promised that the $800 billion stimulus would hold joblessness below a peak of 9%. This package also failed, and today the unemployment rate is in double digits.
Leave it to government to insist we continue down a path with such a sterling record of failure. It is time to abandon the Krugman-championed policies of Keynesian economics. Government cannot create jobs by taking money out of the economy, funneling it through a wasteful bureaucracy, then directing it to the most politically connected and favored industries. No economy has ever been successfully powered by such a model.
The best thing Democrats can do is to stop threatening to destroy so many industries via regulation and government control. This would reduce the uncertainty hampering investment. If they combined that by lowering the rates of the most destructive taxes, such as the corporate and capital gains taxes, an improved job market would follow. Otherwise, we can continue banging our collective heads against the wall while insanely expecting an outcome other than pain.
Comments Print This Post
So says Steny Hoyer:
A House leader says Democrats haven’t yet lined up enough votes to pass their health care overhaul bill.
This couldn’t possibly be related, now could it? But worry not, Pelosi is no doubt busy cracking the whip to bring wayward members, concerned about pesky constituents, back into line with the government takeover of health insurance.
Comments Print This Post
Every piece of legislative problem solving ought to start by answering a simple question: under what Constitutional authority do we act? Given that the Constitution is a document of enumerated powers, a specific empowerment should be found to support the action. Not only does Nancy Pelosi disagree, she and her office thinks it’s ridiculous to even ask:
The exchange with Speaker Pelosi on Thursday occurred as follows:
CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”
Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”
CNSNews.com: “Yes, yes I am.”
Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told CNSNews.com that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a ”serious question.”
“You can put this on the record,” said Elshami. “That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”
Exit question: Ideally, ought this attitude constitute an impeachable breach of her oath to “bear true faith and allegiance to the [Constitution]?”
Hat-tip: Yid with Lid
Comments Print This Post
Before disrupting protesters were un-American, they were praised by Nancy Pelosi (start at 4:50):
Hat-tip: Michelle Malkin
Comments Print This Post
Pelosi and Hoyer in USA Today:
These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades.
Health care is complex. It touches every American life. It drives our economy. People must be allowed to learn the facts.
The idea that it’s un-American to protest consistent congressional dishonesty is as ludicrous as the idea that Obamacare proponents are in any way prohibited from getting their message out. They’ve gotten nothing but extensive and favorable coverage from the press, including an infomercial on ABC and a prime-time Presidential press conference.
The fact of the matter is, if Pelosi and her ilk had their way the legislation would have been passed before Congress even knew the facts, let alone the American people. Nothing about her actions as Speaker has ever indicated an interest in ensuring that Americans have had a chance to digest and debate the merits of particular legislation. Her modus operandi is secrecy and haste, and she’s frightened to death that Americans are finally standing up to say enough is enough.
Update: The Chairman of the Republican Study Committee, Rep. Tom Price, issued a press release over the weekend defending those un-American Americans.
Comments“When no one is listening to them, sometimes people have to speak up,” said Chairman Price. “Over the last few months, a sweeping proposal that will affect the health care of every single American has been negotiated in secret with no input from Republicans, let alone the American people. Rather than listening to the concerns of those who will face the consequences of the legislation, the White House has laughed off the thought that Americans might have sincere concerns about a plan that relies so heavily on government involvement in health care.
“When Americans grew concerned at the speed at which health care reform was being rushed through Congress, Democrats blamed Republicans. When the American people said they aren’t desirous of the government administering their health care, Democrats blamed the insurance companies. Now as Americans want to have their voices heard, the White House asserts that their concerns are manufactured by public relations firms. What the President continues to misunderstand is it’s not special interests or political operatives who have produced the outrage seen across the country. Mr. President, you manufactured this outrage.
Print This Post
The last hiding place of the intellectually devoid:
Comments Print This Post
“Absolutely, we need earmark reform. And when I’m president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.” – Barack Obama, presidential debate, 09/26/2008
Candidate Obama promised tough action on earmarks and wasteful spending. In contrast, his attitude toward earmarks as President has been one of complete disinterest.
Facing criticism over the bloated omnibus bill being frantically championed by a swearing Nancy Pelosi, Obama’s lackeys have been completely dismissive of the idea that the President has any obligation to uphold his promise. Rahm Emanuel blithely declared it “last year’s business.” Peter Orszag, Obama’s OMB chief, used the exact same phrase and then went on to say, “We want to just move on. Let’s get this bill done, get it into law and move forward.”
There is clearly a coordinated campaign to dismiss criticism of the President’s backtracking on waste and earmarks. Taxpayers for Common Sense estimates $7.7 billion from 8500+ in earmarks, though democrats have dishonestly put forth a lower estimate of $3.8 billion. But whatever the exact figure is, it is clear that Obama thinks that, by portraying this as last year’s business that just needs to be passed without scrutiny, he can do on tough issues in Washington what he did in Chicago: vote present.
Comments Print This Post
A common complaint in 2004 was how the damn Bush administration had just gone off and pissed off all our allies. Well, now we have the example of the esteemed co-president and four star general Mrs. Pelosi to follow. First, we learn how to appease our enemies. Now, she is teaching us that the proper way to keep allies close it to attack them and abandon them:
Colombia’s President Alvaro Uribe returned to Bogota this week in a state of shock. His three-day visit to Capitol Hill in Washington to win over Democrats in Congress was described by one American supporter as “catastrophic.” Colombian sources said Uribe was stunned by the ferocity of his Democratic opponents, and Vice President Francisco Santos publicly talked about cutting U.S.-Colombian ties.
Uribe got nothing from his meeting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders. Military aid remains stalled, overall assistance is reduced, and the vital U.S.-Colombian trade bill looks dead. The first Colombian president to crack down on his country’s corrupt army officer hierarchy, and to assault both right-wing paramilitaries and left-wing guerrillas, last week confronted Democrats wedded to out-of-date claims of civil rights abuses and to rigidly protectionist dogma.
This is remarkable U.S. treatment for a rare friend on the South American continent, where Venezuela’s leftist dictator Hugo Chavez can only exult in Uribe’s embarrassment as he builds an anti-American bloc of nations. A former congressional staffer, who in 1999 helped author Plan Colombia against narco-guerrillas, told me: “President Uribe may be the odd man out, and that’s no way to treat our best ally in South America.
More Democratic rhetoric shown to be nothing more than bull.
Comments Print This Post
Sorry, no posts matched your criteria.
I am a libertarian-conservative blogger living in the DC area. I have a Master's degree in Political Science, but please don't hold that against me.
