Barack Obama said he was against super PACs and their involvement in American politics. He excoriated the Supreme Court for its decision in the matter of political donations during one of his State of the Union Addresses. In 2010 Obama said that PACs were a corporate takeover of our Democracy (we have a Republic). Here is what he had to say about it:

“The worst thing of all they don’t have to reveal who is having to pay for them.” Obama said, criticizing Republicans for “keeping the American public in the dark.”

“We cannot allow a corporate takeover of our democracy,” Obama added, vowing to fight this type of advertising. “Let’s challenge every elected official who benefits from these ads to defend this practice or join us is stopping it.” he declared.

“Millions of Americans are struggling to get by and their voices shouldn’t be drowned out by millions of dollars in secret special interest advertising,” Obama added, “Their voices should be heard.” [emphasis mine] Washington Examiner

Obama said our voices needed to be heard and that the challenge was for every elected official to defend the infusion of PAC money or to join Obama in stopping it.

Looks like the Won, the messiah, the change we can believe in has changed his mind on the subject.

In a change of position, Barack Obama’s reelection campaign will begin using administration and campaign aides to fundraise for Priorities USA Action, a super PAC backing the president. CNN Political Tracker

In a change of position, well he did promise us change.

Obama is now playing the game he said he opposed. He is getting involved in the super PAC game in order to raise money for his reelection effort. His minions (and no doubt his toadies who will read this) claim that he needs to do this because of the large influx of money from super PACs on the Republican side.

Obama is doing this because he needs more money and that is supposed to make it OK. The same argument could be made that those who do not oppose super PAC money take it because they need the money to get elected. They too are outgunned (David Axelrod said there is an “array of guns pointed at us” so is this a violent metaphor we can use to blame him if there is violence?) by the people who they are running against. Democrats get large amounts of money from donors (despite the claims of small donors there are lots of big name and big money donors) and they use that money for Democrats to get elected.

A few years ago when Obama was getting boatloads of money for his campaign would he, Axelrod (or any other Democrat) have accepted the excuse from John McCain that he had an array of guns pointed at him so he needed to take PAC money? Hell no! They would have screamed what Obama said in 2010 about corporations taking over our Democracy.

But since Obama wants the money it is now OK to be involved with super PACs.

Here is a video of Obama slamming John Edwards for claiming to be against this kind of money but taking it. Obama says that you can’t just talk the talk; you have to walk the walk.

Mr. Obama, you are now taking the money when you claim to be opposed to it. You can’t talk the talk; you have to walk the walk.

Obama is a hypocrite. I know that liberals will defend this position because they will claim lil’ Barry has to keep up with opponents but that does not make it right. He said he was against the money so he should not take the money.

Then again, this is the guy who said that George Bush was unpatriotic and demonstrated poor leadership for adding trillions of dollars in debt to the country and then promptly added 5 trillion dollars of debt to the country.

If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove you were not a racist you must vote against him in 2012 to prove you are not an idiot.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The funny thing about people who love gun control and continually ignore the Second Amendment is that while they do not want us to be able to protect ourselves they are always on board with having their own protection. We have seen several liberals who think that all guns are bad and that people should not be allowed to carry them only to have it revealed that they have permits and carry handguns. Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are two that come to mind. Then there are those like Rosie O’Donnell who don’t want to allow you protection but are wealthy enough to hire armed body guards.

The sleaziest among us are politicians who tell us how safe society is and that we do not need weapons of our own while they enjoy armed protection that we provide. The leaders in Congress have security details and the security for the president is out of this world. One might think that it is necessary and maybe so but why does a president need security in Chicago or in DC? These places have some of the most stringent gun control in the country and yet these people travel with armed men.

We all know why. Gun control does not work and when law abiding citizens are disarmed the only people who have guns are criminals (which makes those of us who can’t afford armed guards, prey).

The Governor of Maryland is one of these morons who says that all is fine and that we need tough gun control (read that as infringing on Second Amendment rights) because it makes society safer. He has a state police detail of about six armed officers who keep him safe.

We pay his salary and we pay for his protection. What makes him better than the rest of us?

The biggest hypocrite is Richard Daley, the recently retired Mayor of Chicago. This moron has been against gun ownership all his life and he has worked very hard to violate the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The unconstitutional gun laws in Chicago were struck down by the Supreme Court so Daley went to work and set up roadblocks that make it nearly impossible for a resident to get a gun much less carry it. There is no way anyone could call what Chicago does, reasonable.

Daley is retired** and get this. While he does not want the people of Chicago to keep and bear arms he wants an armed protection detail to look out for him. Daley wants a team of armed men paid for by the taxpayers to keep him safe while he has done everything in his power to keep the people of Chicago from being able to protect themselves. He has made them less safe while demanding they pay for his safety.

Now that is first class hypocrisy and it smacks of liberal elitism where this schmuck thinks he is better than the average guy (read this as those who pay his salary and for his protection) and that he deserves better protection than the people who actually pay the salaries of the police officers of the city.

Do you think any average citizen in Chicago could request and get an armed detail to provide a safe environment?

Not likely.

I think the people of Chicago should use whatever legal means are available to keep Daley from getting protection. He should be in the exact same position as everyone else.

He should be just as vulnerable as those whose Constitutional right he has violated.

Perhaps if these politicians were to get a dose of the real world they would wise up.

Perhaps not, especially liberals, but at least without armed protection he has the same chance of being murdered as the next guy.

That, after all, is a level playing field and we all know how much liberals think that all things should be fair and equal for everyone.

Until, of course, to comes to their lives. Then they like things tilted in their favor.

People of Chicago, just say NO.

** Daley leaves office on 17 May

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The price of a gallon of gas when Obama took office was just under two dollars after it had nearly doubled that mark causing Democrats to blame the “oil men” in the White House for the problems. Investigations were launched (nothing was ever found) and when prices went down again, the Democrats moved on to their next item with which to beat the Republican president.

Now gas prices are way up and have eclipsed five dollars a gallon in some places and the price has risen for 35 consecutive days. Obama’s answer has been to blame speculators (were there no speculators the last time) and to tell people perhaps they should not be driving cars that get eight miles to a gallon (without actually knowing if that was the case). Democrats are mostly silent and though Obama is talking the talk, the fact is he wanted gas prices to go higher.

He would have preferred that it was more gradual but he wanted them to rise. In his mind, rising gas prices will force people to cut back consumption and allow him and his regime to pursue their “green” agenda of solar and wind, as if either can power a car.

Before Obama took office he discussed gas prices and said he wanted them to go up so keep this in mind when he acts as if he is pained by it actually happening. He wanted it to happen and it has.

Saying he wanted to see gas prices go up and actually having it happen has a bright side for the Obama supporters.

He finally kept his word on something.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Barack Obama took office as a wet behind the ears rookie with so little experience and so many words that calling him an empty suit was an insult to empty suits. He showed up with his bird chest pumped out ready to take on the world. He had majorities in both chambers of Congress and things were going to be his way. He thought so because he believed the hype about himself. It is a good thing (for him) that he did not try to walk on water.

Believing and doing are two different things.

After taking office Obama was challenged by a Republican on the contents of a package and Obama’s response as to why it would be a certain way; “I won.” To interpret that for you, Obama said it is my way or the highway.

After two years of driving us over the cliff and advancing toward Socialism the American public had enough of this upstart and his sock puppets in Congress and they sent him a very clear message. Obama and his Democrats lost a lot of seats in a historical midterm election that changed the balance of power. Now that Obama does not have majorities all over government, majorities that blamed its failures on Republicans, he has a slightly different tune. In a speech today he told the audience that Republicans cannot have it their way and that this is not how it works.

“At a time when you are struggling to pay your bills and meet your responsibilities, the least we can do to meet our responsibilities is produce a budget. That is not too much to ask for. That is what the American people expect of us, that’s what they deserve. You want everybody to act like adults, quit playing games and realize it is not my way or the highway,” President Obama said in Pennsylvania before he is set to hold a fundraiser tonight. Real Clear Politics

Perhaps an appropriate GOP response to Mr. Obama would be; “we won.”

You see, this is how Democrats work. When they are in charge then things have to go their way and they do not care about anyone or anything. The last Congress made that clear when it passed Obamacare, the unconstitutional law, over the wishes of the majority of Americans. They wanted it and they did not want to hear any other opinion. To them, it was their way or the highway. Democrats went against the will of the people while ignoring the jobs situation and suffering a net job loss over that period of time.

As soon as Democrats lose though, they want to talk about bipartisan compromise and working together. They start whining like a room full of Chuck Schumers about how the other side is not playing nice, blah, blah. They did not want to play nice when they had control and they said, on a number of occasions, we won and it is our way or the highway.

Now they have to eat humble pie and suck it up because, to be quite frank, we won and it is our way or the highway.

America is on a path to financial ruin which has been a long time coming but has been accelerated by a man who has spent more money in two years than all the presidents from Washington to Reagan combined!

[I stated this incorrectly. It should read:

In the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5260 trillion, which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan. CNS

I regret the error]

Now the adults are in charge because THEY WON and it is time for the Democrats to step aside and let them get down to the business of bringing fiscal sanity back to our country.

It is also important to remember, particularly as all the Democrats are out screaming about a government shut down and troops not getting paid, that the Democrats are entirely responsible for this. They had the majorities when the 2011 budget was due and they punted the ball. They refused to pass a budget because they were afraid to do anything prior to the election. If they had done their duty and passed a budget we would not be having this discussion right now and the Congress could be working on other important things.

To the victor goes the spoils and while Obama does not espouse that attitude now he certainly did back when he was still messianic.

Fortunately, he does not get to dictate how the game is played. It works how we want it to work because:

WE WON

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Barack Obama is a hypocrite, of this we have no doubt because he has shown time and again that he will do the very same things he criticized others for. He has done some of the very things that Bush did and for which Obama criticized Bush but the Obama sock puppets remain silent. Why, this man is trying to run our country and fix things so he should have some room to operate. How can we get in the way of this gifted speaker?

Obama used the week long recess, yes I wrote WEEK LONG, to appoint a controversial figure to be the head of Medicare and Medicaid. Obama did not do this over the August recess or the Christmas (winter for you pagan progressives) recess, no he did it over a week long recess and he did it in order to avoid the confirmation process.

Dr. Donald Berwick will be a recess appointment because he is controversial and he is opposed by most Republicans. He has made statements in the past about the need to ration care (whether we will do it with our eyes open or closed as we do now) and he would have received some very tough questioning had he gone before the Senate.

The White House is trying to lay this hypocritical move on Republicans by claiming that Republicans wanted to stall the process for political reasons. This is not true and is an attempt to either rationalize the move or rewrite history. In either case, it is not true. Berwick was nominated in April and the Democrats have not set a schedule for his confirmation hearings. They could have done that but they do not want the whole health care issue, one opposed by the majority of voters, brought up again before the midterm elections. This is the real reason that Obama is making the recess appointment.

Unfortunately, this means that Berwick will be damaged goods. This is not my opinion but the opinion of (mmm mmm mmm) Barack Hussein Obama himself. When George Bush made the 2005 recess appointment of James Bolton to be UN Ambassador, Obama had this to say:

To some degree, he’s damaged goods,” said Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “I think that means we’ll have less credibility and, ironically, be less equipped to reform the United Nations in the way that it needs to be reformed.

So according to Obama, Berwick will have less credibility and be less equipped to reform Medicaid and Medicare in the ways they need to be reformed.

HIS OWN WORDS ABOUT A RECESS APPOINTEE.

But wait, there’s more! When Bush made the 2007 recess appointment of Sam Fox as Ambassador to Belgium it was again, guess who, (mmm mmm mmm) Barack Hussein Obama who made the following statement:

It’s disappointing that President Bush would defy the will of Congress by appointing Sam Fox Ambassador to Belgium. I opposed Mr. Fox’s nomination because I had serious concerns about his candor, judgment, and qualifications for this important post. Appointing nominees that are opposed by a majority in Congress simply because they are political cronies is old style politics at its worst. Our nation’s ambassadors should possess strong credibility and character so that they may effectively represent U.S. interests overseas, and I don’t think President Bush applied that test with this recess appointment.

Well, well, well. Disappointing that a president would DEFY the will of Congress by making a recess appointment of someone opposed by members of Congress. Obama said a majority but we can’t know that because they never held the confirmation hearing. However, there were certainly people with concerns about the nomination because Obama indicates that he was one of them. So he was disappointed that the will of Congress was defied when he, Obama Almighty, was not able to question the person he opposed but he feels completely fine about appointing a person who is opposed by other members of Congress.

This is another example of Obama’s inability to lead. He talked a great game and feigned righteous indignation at the appropriate times but now that he is in the hot seat the very expectations he had of others do not apply to him.

This is the problem with people who have a messiah complex. They think they are above the rules, even the rules they once agreed with. It is equally true of those who hold Obama up as their messiah because they will completely ignore what he did or rationalize it.

Hear is some news for these people:

God gave us a Messiah, we need a president.

Source for Obama quotes:
Alpha Patriot

Big Dog Salute to Ron Smith of WBAL.

Never surrender, Never submit.

This past year has been a tough one for Democrats. They had majorities in both chambers of Congress that were big enough not to need one Republican vote and they could not pass signature items. They have become frustrated with the lack of progress on their Socialization plan so they want to do a few things to give them the upper hand. They want to eliminate the filibuster and they want to invoke reconciliation, a budgetary procedure, in order to pass their the health care takeover bill.

When the Republicans were in charge, they too became frustrated with the Democrats for using the same procedures that they [Republicans] now employ. The Republicans were going to use the nuclear or Constitutional option to allow a simple majority to pass judicial nominees.

The left went nuts over this and talked about how the filibuster was important and how the Founders knew what they were doing and how Republicans in the Senate did not do what Senators throughout history have done [say no to a power hungry president]. Joe Biden said it all when he stated:

I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.

God must have decided not to weigh in on Biden’s prayer because the Democrats are involved in the very kind of “naked power grab” Biden lamented over.

Go view the video compilation of Democrats [Breitbart TV] who weighed in on the issue back when they were the minority party and see how their attitudes differ from what they want to do today.

The word hypocrite comes to mind but decide for yourself.

Take particular note of then Senator Barack Obama. In fact, Obama, Clinton, Biden, and Dodd all had something to say and each ran for the presidency…

Barack Obama and his Democrats took over where George Bush left off and bailed out banks and other financial institutions to the tune of billions of dollars. These entities were “too big to fail” and were spared the consequences of their bad decisions, decisions fueled by greed. Fueled by greed and knowledge that they would be bailed out if they made bad mistakes.

The financial giants reap huge rewards when they make investments and then get taxpayer money to save them when they gamble and lose. Ann Coulter has a great piece this week laying this all out. In it she describes what happened with regard to Goldman Sachs and other institutions that packaged bad loans and then insured them through AIG which could not cover the losses. Taxpayers bailed out AIG which was the same as bailing out Goldman.

During all of this, Obama went on the blame the bankers tour and discussed the greedy guys and how their salaries needed to be capped. There were tours by the homes of AIG executives, Congress worked on legislation taxing bonuses at 90% and the citizens of America were worked into a frenzy over the greedy bankers.

But these people helped put Obama in office. Obama received huge sums of money from the financial industry and they have been friends of the Democrats for a long time (as Coulter points out, Clinton bailed them out during his presidency). So it came as no surprise this week that Obama said he did not begrudge the bonuses of savvy bankers (particularly the ones who are his supporters):

Whatever Obama has in mind for punishing the financial industry, I promise you, he won’t punish his friends. After JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon took a $17 million bonus this week, and Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein got a $9 million bonus, Obama said he didn’t begrudge them their bonuses, saying, “I know both those guys.” Ann Coulter Human Events

What happened to people not getting huge bonuses? What happened to Barney Frank and his desire to cap salaries and bonuses of all of them even if they took no TARP money? What happened to the outrage generated by Obama and his minions over these greedy bankers?

I have no problem with bankers (or any private business people) making huge sums of money for doing a good job and I have no problem with huge bonuses. I did not have trouble with the AIG bonuses particularly because the Obama administration knew about them and people worked for a dollar a year in salary on the promise of the bonuses (which the administration then reneged on). I also have no problem with a business failing if it can’t make money and that includes financial giants and auto makers. If they can’t cut it then they can fail.

However, I am not the one who ran around whipping the country into a frenzy over greedy bankers. How dare Obama call these people greedy and rail against them last year and then step up to defend their huge bonuses this year? How can he do this and remain consistent?

He can’t, but he does not have to. If he says it is good his base will blindly follow. They will ignore Obama’s words and deeds of the past and focus on what the messiah says now. They will not draw the connection between Obama and the campaign dollars he gets from these people.

When Obama said he knows these people he meant the bankers but it could apply to his base.

Interestingly, David Reilly at Bloomberg has a piece that basically says Obama needs to man up and knock a few heads to show people who is in charge (note to Reilly, coequal means that he is not in charge of Congress). He writes about several issues which are better saved for another time but he does address financial regulation. Reilly spells out a number of tactics that Obama can use to threaten the banking industry into submission. The tactics look like something one would expect from Tony Soprano and not the leader of the US but Reilly is encouraging the kinds of tactics the left would scream fascist or Nazi over if a Republican did them.

The government owes the private sector about 7 trillion dollars. Suppose the banks called those markers all at once? Suppose the banks stopped lending for a week. I imagine if they tried hard they could send the economy in the Great Depression range so perhaps the mafia style tactics would be a poor idea.

Then again, Reilly is like typical supporters who decry strong-arm politics when Republicans use them but espouse them in order to push the Democrat agenda. This is typical of the left and we see it in Congress whenever they are in charge. We can’t knock heads of terrorists or it is torture but we can do what we want to those who oppose us…

I think the hypocrisy of Obma has been exposed in the past and it is very clear in his latest support of the huge bonuses. I also think we have a number of leftists in the media calling for him to get tough because they are worried about a Palin presidency.

Whether she will run or not or could even win is not the point.

Just the idea of that drives liberals and the progressives nuts.

And that is a joy to see.

One would think that since Al Gore invented the Internet, Democrats would know it exists and would know that people can look things up quickly. It is now possible to retrieve information in a matter of seconds when it use to take hours or days and sometimes even longer.

It seems Democrats do not know this because they keep saying or doing things that are totally different from what they said and did in the past. Take Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, the moron who said that those who oppose the health care bill were right wing extremists and members of the Aryan groups. This guy had some other nice things to say.

This happened when the defense appropriations bill was being debated. The Republicans were dragging it out as long as the legislative process allowed in order to delay the health care debate. Here is what Whitehouse had to say about this:

“The lowest of the low was the Republican vote against funding and supporting our troops in the field in a time of war. As a device to stall health care, they tried to stop the appropriation of funds for our soldiers. There is no excuse for that. From that there is no return. ” Legal Insurrection

The Republicans did not vote against funding the troops. They voted against cloture and then objected to an immediate vote once cloture was achieved. These were procedural items to drag it out. The troops got funded as was the intention all along.

However, let us look at this statement. Whitehouse says there is no excuse for trying to stop the appropriations (once again, they just tried to delay it, not stop it) and that from this there is no return.

In 2007, as reported in the linked article, Whitehouse was one of 14 Senators who voted against the Iraq war funding supplemental to support the troop surge. That is right ladies and gentlemen, Whitehouse voted not to fund our troops. He voted against funds for our soldiers. He was also a cosponsor to a bill that would cut off all funding unless troop withdrawals began in 120 days. Did he object to Obama’s additional troop request and did he try to impose a withdrawal deadline? Probably not because Obama is the messiah.

Mr. Whitehouse, there is no excuse and there is no return. Those are your words. This guy is a total hypocrite (as are most of the liberals who voiced their objection on this issue) and he is a disgrace to his office. What was that thing about glass houses and stones?

Sheldon Whitehouse is a moron. No, Whitehouse gives morons a bad name.

Oh the left is up in arms! The Defense Appropriations Bill is before the Senate and it is usually a bill that passes quickly but Republicans are using legal procedural tactics to delay the vote on the bill. The reason for this is obvious, they want to take up time with this bill to delay getting to the health care bill. This is perfectly acceptable and in no way harms the troops.

The bill had a cloture vote at 0100 this morning and Democrats got enough votes for cloture. They then immediately asked for the bill to be voted on but at least one Republican objected. This means there will be 30 hours of debate on the bill and it will be voted on Saturday morning at 0730. The defense funding ends at midnight but the delay to Saturday morning will not affect anything in defense.

The Republicans are smart to require all procedures to be followed and to use up time. If they can keep prolonging the health care debate by using parliamentary procedures and as long as it does not hurt the troops, which it does NOT, then it is OK.

Democrats are indignant about all of this and want to know how Republicans can do this to the troops. These guys have short memories and seem to forget all the times they opposed troop funding and delayed defense bills. The White House site is scolding the Republicans and using quotes from Republicans that were used in the past to oppose delaying funding the troops:

“Playing politics with the critical funding that our troops need now is political theater of the worst kind.” – Sen. John Cornyn, [Press Release, 4/26/07]
“We have plenty of time and plenty of opportunity to have political debates… but it’s just unconscionable to me to tie the hands of the very troops that we all say we support.” – Sen. John Cornyn, [Transcript, Senate Republican News Briefing, 4/10/07]
“Every day we don’t fund our troops is a day their ability to fight this war is weakened.” – Sen. Mitch McConnell, [Press Release, 3/31/07]
“No way to treat the troops, and it is entirely inconsistent with [Senators’] expressions of support for the troops.” – Sen. Mitch McConnell, [Congressional Record, 10/4/07]
“I don’t understand this attitude of, ‘We can play with; we can risk the lives of these troops by waiting until the last possible minute to get the funding to them.” – Sen. Jon Kyl, [FOX News Transcript, 4/10/07]
“Our obligation to those troops must transcend politics.” – Sen. Jon Kyl, [Press Release, 11/8/07]

All of these quotes were in response to Democrat opposition or delay with regard to troop funding bills. This list of quotes proves that Democrats were guilty of the very thing they are now acting high and mighty about. If Democrats were not guilty of the same thing in the past then these quotes would not exist.

The truth is that when the time for debate is over the bill will pass and all the Republicans will vote for it. They are just using all the time allotted for the debate.

Democrats act as if this delay will be the end of the world. When Obama took 90 days to decide on the troop request for Afghanistan the Democrats said he was deliberative and could not rush into a decision. Republicans use the 30 hours allotted for debate and they are the ones delaying the troops and causing harm.

Another point of contention in this bill is that Democrats added a “doc fix” to it. This is a non defense item that will raise the reimbursement to doctors under Medicare. This does not belong in the Defense bill but it was put in so it would be assured of passage. Putting it here rather than in the appropriations for Medicare allows Congress to hide the true cost of Medicare. This will go against defense when it really pays for Medicare. This is one of the accounting tricks I discussed in the past. The cost of Medicare is much higher than reported because of things like this, which happen every year.

This is the bill that Democrats wanted to add a 1.9 trillion dollar provision to raise the debt ceiling. They could have put it in the appropriate appropriations bill but were afraid they would not get cloture so they were going to put it in the defense bill where they knew they would. It was not added because of other concerns including demands for a balanced budget. If it had been added then I would have expected all Republicans to vote against it.

They would still get a defense bill and fast but it would be without the debt ceiling provision.

In any event, it is the Democrats who are playing politics with the defense bill. They wanted to use it to slip the debt ceiling provision in and they have included the “doc fix” both of which are political issues. Let’s get it clear, the only reason this is in the defense bill is because it will pass that way and so they can hide the true cost of Medicare. The impact on our debt does not change but they can hide the true cost of the Medicare program.

This is what they will do every year if health care overhaul is passed. They will put anything that adds to the cost in other bills to hide the cost and the deficit will continue to increase while they lie about why.

The bottom line is, regardless of all the grandstanding being done by Democrats, the bill will pass and the Republicans will vote for it. It will not hurt the troops or defense.

The Republicans are within their right to use the procedures and they did so. If the Democrats wanted this voted on before the deadline then they should have introduced it earlier. The delay is all their fault and it is a failure of leadership.

At least Republicans are doing things legally. The Democrats stopped the reading of an amendment this week and did so in complete violation of Senate rules. They just decided they were going to stop it and allow the sponsor to withdraw the amendment. This is a violation of Senate rules but that did not bother the Democrats.

Yet when Republicans use the rules the Democrats get upset.

The hypocrisy makes me sick.

I do love it though. This forces them to commute to the Senate chamber in the huge snowstorm that is heading toward DC.

How appropriate considering the snow job the Democrats are involved in.

The debate in the Senate over health care is dragging on and the pressure is on Harry Reid to get a bill passed. He has met stiff resistance and no matter what he does he alienates another segment of the Senate so that he does not have the number of votes needed to pass the bill. Reid feels the debate is so important that he recently decided that the Senate would work weekends because this issue is just so darned important:

“The American people don’t get weekends off from this injustice,” Reid said. “Bankruptcy doesn’t keep bankers’ hours. The bills don’t go away just because it’s a Saturday; the pain doesn’t go away just because it’s a Sunday.” Las Vegas Sun

Reid probably figured that Republicans would cave because they had to work weekends but that will not happen but I have felt from the start that it would not be long before all of the Senators grew restless. They will all want to get home for Christmas and will stop debate.

Harry Reid has however, found one thing that is more important than the health care debate and that would be his political career. Reid is in a fight for his seat and it appears, unless something drastic happens, that he will lose next November. If the comments in the linked article are any indication, the people in Nevada can’t wait.

Yes, health care is very important to Harry Reid and he mandated weekend work but his career is more important so he has asked that the Republicans agree to taking this weekend off so that Harry can attend a fundraiser in New Orleans. Political whore Mary Landrieu and Harry Reid will be in the Big Easy at a $1000 (plus) per plate dinner in order to raise money for their reelections.

Yes ladies and gentlemen, a political fundraiser is more important than the health care debate. The American people might not get the weekend off from the “injustice” but Harry Reid wants the weekend off so he can raise money for his political career. Remember this the next time the morons tell you how important this issue is. It is not too important for Reid to stop work so he can raise money for his reelection campaign. Reelecting him would be the true injustice.

This should say all that needs to be said about the priorities of Harry Reid and for that matter, most other politicians. Their first two priorities, no matter what, are to get elected and to get reelected.

Reid can see the writing on the wall. He knows that he is toast next year and that he will have to give up his plush job. He knows that he is pushing an agenda that most Americans do not support and he knows that the reason that it is being pushed is to make Obama look good. This will backfire.

The stimulus was so important that it had to be passed immediately and before anyone had time to read it. Then it sat on Obama’s desk for four days while he took his wife on a date.

Health care is so important that it must be done immediately (even though no benefits will be seen until 2013 or 2014) and it is so important that the Senate must work weekends.

Until Harry Reid needs some time off to raise money for his reelection.

Self serving is a good description of Harry Reid.

LATE WORD: Late word from the linked article is that Republicans did not agree to the weekend off. Senator Mitch McConnell said that Reid told them they would be working every weekend and Republicans took him at his word.

Republicans rejected Reid’s request Thursday morning to fast track several spending bills, clear the floor for health reform votes next week, and take the weekend off.

“Republicans are prepared to provide a platform for the debate as long as it takes,” said Sen. Mitch McConnell, noting that “The majority leader said we would be working every weekend and we took him at his word.”

We expect to be here this weekend and we look forward to it. Republicans believe there is nothing more important we can do than stop this bill and start over… we are eager to continue the debate.”

“I know people have fundraisers because they are running for reelection and people have other important things to do, but there is nothing more important to do than this,” said McConnell.

What a nice way to make Reid choke on his own words. I have issues with McConnell but I agree with him on this one. Shove Reid’s words down his throat and make him choke on them just as the Democrats are doing to the American people with the health care bill.

UPDATE: The fundraiser has been canceled. This is outstanding. Of course Reid and Landrieu will make it appear as if they are doing such important work that they could not be pulled away. The reality is that Republicans held Reid to his word. This is getting fun. Perhaps ole Harry should have thought about this when he mandated the weekend work (not that I am opposed to them working weekends). I mean, he had to have known the fundraiser was scheduled…