The Democrats are assaulting the very pillars of our democracy. As the debate on Obamacare reaches the long, painful end, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is confronting a political nightmare. She may not have the 216 votes necessary to pass the Senate’s health care bill in the House.

Hence, Mrs. Pelosi and her congressional Democratic allies are seriously considering using a procedural ruse to circumvent the traditional constitutional process. Led by Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, New York Democrat and chairman of the House Rules Committee, the new plan – called the “Slaughter Solution” – is not to pass the Senate version on an up-or-down vote. Rather, it is to have the House “deem” that the legislation was passed and then have members vote directly on a series of “sidecar” amendments to fix the things it does not like.

This would enable House Democrats to avoid going on the record voting for provisions in the Senate bill – the “Cornhusker Kickback,” the “Louisiana Purchase,” the tax on high-cost so-called “Cadillac” insurance plans – that are reviled by the public or labor-union bosses. If the reconciliation fixes pass, the House can send the Senate bill to President Obama for his signature without ever having had a formal up-or-down vote on the underlying legislation.

Mr. Obama is imposing a leftist revolution. Since coming to office, he has behaved without any constitutional restraints. The power of the federal government has exploded. He has de facto nationalized key sectors of American life – the big banks, financial institutions, the automakers, large tracts of energy-rich land from Montana to New Mexico. His cap-and-trade proposal, along with a newly empowered Environmental Protection Agency, seeks to impose massive new taxes and regulations upon industry. It is a form of green socialism: Much of the economy would fall under a command-and-control bureaucratic corporatist state. Mr. Obama even wants the government to take over student loans.

I’m not one to hop on the ‘Impeach Obama’ bandwagon, but if Obama will support the Slaughter Solution to get the left’s agenda through (and you know he will), then I say it is worth doing.  Remember folks, this is not the first time we have heard of the Slaughter Solution being proposed. Go back to March of this year when it was being proposed for the health care bill:  Click here for the Politico story.  Instead of using the solution then, they muddied up the political waters to the point where nobody knew what they were looking at, cut deals with just enough fellow Democrats to get the bill passed, and showed Pelosi walking around with a huge gavel held like some battle ax.

This political garbage has to end sometime, and I say now is the right time.  The left can say Republicans used this process in the past, and I’ll say I don’t care.  Just because something was done in the past doesn’t make it okay now.  Throw on top of this, the majority of Americans oppose Obama and the left on the very issues they are contemplating using the Slaughter Solution on.  That in itself should give America the opportunity to send the strongest message possible to the president (and the rest of the morons in government) and let them all know circumventing the constitution will not be tolerated.

Kuhner makes a good case for impeachment.  Will it go anywhere?  Probably not.  But if it does, it will be done in the best interest of America because it will be the only way to stop our insane government from continuously going against the will of the people.

.

.

Yes folks, Iran is going the way of China and taking over the internet in their country.

Excerpts from the Jerusalem Post:  Iran to Replace Google With ‘Oh Lord’

“They are not just developing a search engine, they want to develop an Intranet, instead of an Internet, which would be some kind of local Internet and only give access to state institutions and internally approved sites,” Pujan Ziaie, a senior IT strategist in Iran’s ‘green’ opposition movement told The Media Line. “The discussion began a few years ago and is based on a feeling that the Internet is a Western weapon. They are threatened by it but they cannot ignore it so they are trying to imitate what China has done.”

In expected fashion, the Iranian government is disputing the takeover theory, saying this:

But a source close to the government, who asked not to be identified, said the initiative was simply a matter of providing more locally relevant content to Internet users.

“In different search enginges, different things come up first,” he told The Media Line. “There’s a certain formula that makes certain things come up first when you use Google whereas when you use Yahoo other things come up first. In Iran, local websites do not appear first in the results, meaning the suggested websites are not necessarily the most valuable sources of information.”

“So I don’t see this as replacing the Internet or current search engines,” he said. “In general the government is just trying to become less and less reliant on Western sources for everything.”

Hmmmmmm…….  Search engine, controlled by the government, called “Oh Lord”, with a goal to show only “valuable” information (as dictated by the government).

.

.

From Hot Air:

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer angrily demanded yesterday that the White House withdraw their report to the UN Human Rights Council that singled out Arizona’s law as a cause for concern about the American track record on human rights.  Calling such a reference “downright offensive” in her letter to Hillary Clinton, Brewer also called the entire report “internationalism run amuck”:

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer demanded Friday that a reference to the state’s controversial immigration law be removed from a State Department report to the United Nations’ human rights commissioner.

The U.S. included its legal challenge to the law on a list of ways the federal government is protecting human rights.

In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Brewer says it is “downright offensive” that a state law would be included in the report, which was drafted as part of a UN review of human rights in all member nations every four years.

“The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a state of the United States to ‘review’ by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional,” Brewer wrote.

It looks to me like Obama wants the rest of the world to have a say on America’s immigration policy.  How’s this for a load of you-know-what?

QUICK RANT:  Obama and the left still fail to admit Arizona is merely enforcing federal law, something the feds have been ignoring for way too long.  And the pro-illegal immigration crowd says absolutely nothing about immigration laws of other countries, like Mexico.  From Michelle Malkin:  How Mexico treats illegal immigrants

– The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?

– If outsiders do not enhance the country’s “economic or national interests” or are “not found to be physically or mentally healthy,” they are not welcome. Neither are those who show “contempt against national sovereignty or security.” They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.

– Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama’s illegal alien aunt — a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).

– Law enforcement officials at all levels — by national mandate — must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens’ arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.

– Ready to show your papers? Mexico’s National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens’ identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.

Notice the part about immigrants proving they will not be economic burdens, no criminal history, pass an exam and prove they can PROVIDE THEIR OWN HEALTH CARE????  Last time I checked, Obama has not asked his beloved U.N. to look into Mexico for potential human rights violations.  Does this mean it is okay for a country to have tough immigration laws unless that country is America?

Anyway, back to the load of you-know-what.  What kind of POTUS throws one of America’s states under the bus by asking a world wide body to review our immigration law and voice their opinion on a state enforcing said law?  I’ll tell you what kind of POTUS: the one who puts his own personal agenda first and the best interest of America last.

Oh yeah, one last thing.  For all you who love to say “America was built on immigrants”, don’t forget to include this little tidbit:  immigrants that came to America legally.

.

.

No mention of the fact he did nothing more than follow the plan laid out by Bush all those years ago………….

Now here comes the big question.  If things go downhill in Iraq over the next year, will he give himself credit for that as well?

.

.

Which brings me to the point of this posting.  Ted Nugent weighs in on government wasteful spending.  Of course, he does it in his usual politically Nuge way.

Excerpts from Human Events:  Ted Nugent – Pigs of Waste

Senators John McCain and Tom Coburn just released a report on more insane and wasteful blow torching by Fedzilla (the federal bureaucracy) of our tax dollars on things we don’t need or want and only someone mentally deranged would allow.

After reading an article that illuminated the most wasteful examples of torching our tax dollars, I’m surprised my request for a federal grant to study gopher hunting with grenades on the White House lawn was denied. Seemed like such a gimme.

My favorite part of Ted’s writing is this:

Martin Gross wrote a wonderful, albeit outrageous, book a few years ago titled The Government Racket: Washington Waste from A to Z that identified dozens and dozens of costly and wasteful Fedzilla projects. Buy this book, send it to your congressman and demand a book report.

I’m guessing the liberals in government would say take the health care bill approach and say they just don’t have time to actually read it.

Anyway, read the whole thing.  And remember this when your congressman says they need to raise taxes because the country has too much debt.

.

.

Excerpts:  First, the comparison between Bush’s and Obama’s performances is inapt. This fact has a lot to do with federal law. In the case of Katrina, the statute directing response efforts was the 1988 Stafford Act, which puts on-shore states—not the federal government—in charge. Louisiana officials received federal offers of help as Katrina approached, but they were rejected.

The BP spill is quite different. As explained in a recent Minority Report released by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), on which I serve as ranking member, the federal statute governing the response is the 1990 Oil Pollution Act (OPA), passed after the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The OPA specifies that, in the event of an offshore oil spill, the President shall ensure effective and immediate removal, mitigation, or prevention of a substantial threat to human health and welfare.

In the case of Katrina, the folks who were supposed to be in charge ran away, leaving it up to someone else to take care of.  In the case of the oil spill, the person in charge did essentially the same thing.  And what do the folks who were supposed to be in charge have in common?  I’ll give you a hint: they all were voted in as Democrats.  Those who had to step in and take the reigns?  Let’s just say they do not carry a card with a donkey on it.

.

.

Democrats privately fear House prospects worsening

Top Democrats are growing markedly more pessimistic about holding the House, privately conceding that the summertime economic and political recovery they were banking on will not likely materialize by Election Day.

In conversations with more than two dozen party insiders, most of whom requested anonymity to speak candidly about the state of play, Democrats in and out of Washington say they are increasingly alarmed about the economic and polling data they have seen in recent weeks.

Adam Tragone:  Waking the American Beast

As we approach the two year anniversary of that dreadful day, the “presidency” of Barack Obama has been nothing short of a catastrophe and is serving as a catalyst for the return of strong conservative candidates to oust the RINOs and leftists that populate the U.S. Capitol building. Last night’s primaries serve as another indicator that the American people are fed up with their elected representatives and they won’t stand for the American republic to go the way of the dodo, as the Obamaniacs destroy my generation’s, my children’s generation’s, and my grandchildren’s generation’s standard of living. We will not stand for it. We have awoke

Election results send warning to GOP hierarchy

Primary results in two very different states on opposite ends of the country are sending shock waves through the Republican establishment.

In Florida, wealthy businessman Rick Scott won the GOP nomination in the governor’s race, and in Alaska, a Sarah Palin-endorsed outsider may score an upset victory over Sen. Lisa Murkowski.

The outcomes were a vivid reminder that voters are just as willing to send pink slips to establishment Republicans as they are the Democrats who control Washington.

Voters:  The Party’s Over

Voters desperate for an alternative to both parties in Washington got another dose of good news in this week’s primaries.

In Florida and, it appears, also in Alaska, Republican voters once again sent a chilling message to their own party leadership in Washington.

No, they cannot stomach the untethered liberalism of Democrats in Washington any longer. But nor can they stand the GOP recklessness we saw the last time the “conservative” party was in power.

It’s still early, and there is a lot of lying campaigning to come, but so far so good.

.

.

Here’s the story:  James Cameron – King of Hypocrites by Ann McElhinney

The Avatar director was determined to expose journalists, such as myself, who thought it was important to ask questions about climate change orthodoxy and the radical “solutions” being proposed.

Cameron said was itching to debate the issue and show skeptical journalists and scientists that they were wrong.

“I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads,” he said in an interview.

Well, a few weeks ago Mr. Cameron seemed to honor his word.

His representatives contacted myself and two other well known skeptics, Marc Morano of the Climate Depot website and Andrew Breitbart, the new media entrepreneur.

Mr. Cameron was attending the AREDAY environmental conference in Aspen Colorado 19-22 August. He wanted the conference to end with a debate on climate change. Cameron would be flanked with two scientists. It would be 90 minutes long. It would be streamed live on the internet.

They hoped the debate would attract a lot of media coverage.

“We are delighted to have Fox News, Newsmax, The Washington Times and anyone else you’d like. The more the better,” one of James Cameron’s organizers said in an email.

It looked like James Cameron really was a man of his word who would get to take on the skeptics  he felt were so endangering humanity.

Everyone on our side agreed with their conditions. The debate was even listed on the AREDAY agenda.

But then as the debate approached James Cameron’s side started changing the rules.

The story gets better and better.  Out with the debate, in with a round table.  Then out with all cameras, in with cameras only supplied by Cameron’s side.  Then, out with all cameras, and shortly after that out with the media as a whole.  Not even a recording could be made of the debate round table discussion.  And finally, Cameron backed out of the whole thing.

So, why did Cameron and Company insist on all the changes before backing out?  I think the answer is simple.  He wanted Ann McElhinney and her friends to back out first!  Cameron and Company threw down a challenge they could not handle.  So, rather than backing out right away they constantly changed the format, hoping the opposition would say “we’re not going to attend unless the debate includes _______.”  Problem is, the opposition did not back out!!

Makes me think of the ‘tough guy’ who says he is going to beat the crap out of you while insisting his friends hold him back, keeping him out of the fight in the first place.

Maybe some day one of these climate change folks will actually have an open debate with the other side with the media present.  And maybe someday hell will freeze over.  If I was a betting man, I would put my money on Satan wearing a parka.

.

.

So much for hope…….

Marguerite Higgins:  Obamacare Proponents Running Scared

Excerpt:  A new messaging strategy, based on public polling results from top Democratic pollsters, suggests that congressional lawmakers should wave the white flag when discussing Obamacare in their election campaigns. The PowerPoint presentation, released in a conference call organized by Families USA, encouraged officials to “keep claims small and credible: don’t overpromise or ‘spin’ what the law delivers.”

In other words, abandon ship on claims that lawmakers made for months during the health reform debate—that the legislation would in any way reduce the nation’s deficit or lower health care costs (in fact, this was a recommendation in the presentation’s “not-to-do” list).

The pollsters are telling the Dems in office to NOT lie about Obamacare?  This should be interesting!!!!!

.

.

H/T Jerrod K.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.