Big Dogs House

To Reconcile Or Not To Reconcile

Feb 26, 2010 Political

The health care summit was held yesterday and I don’t think Obama and the Democrats were ready for the Republicans who came ready to discuss issues. In the end the thing was a waste of time because Obama’s position was basically, here is what I want now sign on or we will have to use reconciliation.

What? Come now Big Dog. Reconciliation was addressed a number of times by Republicans and the Democrats said that no one was discussing using it. As an aside, please do not get confused between reconciliation and the filibuster as Rachael Maddow did. Harry Reid said this:

No one has said — I read what the President has online — no one has talked about reconciliation but that’s what you folks have talked about ever since that came out, as if it’s something that has never been done before.” (“Transcript: White House Health Summit, Morning Session,” Kaiser Health News, 2/25/10)

So there you have it right from Harry Reid, no one has been discussing this except the Republicans who are getting all worked up over nothing.

According to The Hill, Harry Reid was interviewed and in a posting from 2/20/10 Reid was indeed discussing reconciliation.

“I’ve had many conversations this week with the president, his chief of staff, and Speaker Pelosi,” Reid said during an appearance Friday evening on “Face to Face with Jon Ralston” in Nevada. “And we’re really trying to move forward on this.”

The majority leader said that while Democrats have a number of options, they would likely use the budget reconciliation process to pass a series of fixes to the first healthcare bill passed by the Senate in November. These changes are needed to secure votes for passage of that original Senate bill in the House.

“We’ll do a relatively small bill to take care of what we’ve already done,” Reid said, affirming that Democrats would use the reconciliation process. “We’re going to have that done in the next 60 days.”

Remember now, Harry Reid was before America at the summit and said no one was discussing this. No one was discussing it except him, Pelosi, Obama and his staff. All of these no ones have been discussing reconciliation.

So, if as Obama says, no one cares how this gets done or America does not care about the procedures, why did Harry Reid lie?

The reality is that a lot of people do not like this bill. People like parts of it but they do not like it, especially how much it will cost and all the unnecessary things that give government more control over our lives. Reid lied because he knows people do not like it and it would be real difficult for him to explain why reconciliation has been decided upon prior to the summit.

Reid is a liar and he will lose come this November.

Remember folks, never trust a Democrat. The summit was full of deception and theater so they could say they tried.

Share on Facebook

Tags: lies, Obama, reconciliation, Reid, summit

How Black Republicans Feel About What Reid Said

Jan 11, 2010 Political

From Frances Rice, NBRA:

Wielding a sharp racial sword, Democrats ruthlessly destroy the careers of Republicans on racial matters, accepting no apologies. Yet, using a glaring double standard, those same Democrats quickly give a pass to any Democrat, such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who again displayed egregious racism.

Hardly a ripple of protest was made in 2004 when Reid shamelessly slurred Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as an incompetent Negro who could not write good English. “Slap at Thomas stinks of racism,” was the headline of the New York Daily News’ December 7, 2004 editorial.

Now, Reid has described then-Senator Barack Obama as “light skinned” and “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” With this racial slur, Reid denigrates not only Obama, but also the entire population of black Americans as being uneducated Negroes who cannot speak standard English, the same type of disgusting remark he made over five years ago about Justice Thomas, a graduate of Yale Law School. A tribute to Justice Thomas [link in original] that includes details about his stellar career is posted on the NBRA website. Read the rest

It strikes me that Al Sharpton said Reid’s comments disturbed him but that it was not the same as what Lott said. Lott was praising a 100 year old man and he made the comment that if Thurmond had been elected in 1948 we would not have these problems. It is only speculation as to what Lott meant but he apologized all over for offending people. Though Diane Feinstein says no Democrats jumped up and down about it she was actually one of those who did as did Barack Obama. How is it that Reid’s apology allows him a pass and Lott’s did not?

I remember Barack Obama saying that he could not be accountable for his association with a man who did despicable things when he (Barack) was only 8 years old. When Strom Thurmond ran for the presidency in 1948 Lott was 7 years old.

How can we hold him accountable for what he said about a guy who ran for president under segregation when Lott was only 7 unless we can now believe that Obama is guilty by association with Ayers?

What Lott said was wrong depending on what he meant. He never explained that. What Reid said was wrong unless he can tell us not what he meant, that has been explained, but whether he also holds those beliefs. If this had been Reid’s only foray into the world of racism then it might be excused but, as the NBRA piece points out, Reid made a racist remark about Justice Thomas.

The other thing that people miss in this is the implication of what Reid said and that is that Obama is attractive because he is not your typical black guy (before you lefties call that racist remember you gave Obama a pass on the typical white person remark).

The explanation is that Reid was saying that Obama was attractive to Americans because he is light skinned and does not speak negro. Does this not mean he believes that the racists in America will not vote for a dark skinned person who speaks negro, whatever that is.

Americans will vote for a person who can lead regardless of color (and as has been shown with Obama and Carter, they will vote for someone who can’t lead regardless of color). And since the left bashed Bush daily about his manner of speech we have to assume that speech is not a big issue with regard to getting elected.

I wish Reid were held to the same standards as a Republican but that is never going to happen as long as liberals continue to excuse racism from the left. So, since he will not be forced to step down, it will be just as much fun watching this brain damaged moron bumble his way through life and it will be even more fun watching him be removed by the voters.

Barack Obama said it would be up to Republicans to drive Lott out. They did but as Obama showed by accepting Reid’s apology, he does not hold Democrats to the same standard.

Maybe when it is all said and done Obama can have a beer summit with Reid and invite Robert Byrd to explain racism and the history of the Democrat organization known as the KKK.

Might be a bit much to ask since Reid and Byrd might expect Obama to serve the beer. After all, a few years ago he would have been getting Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy coffee…

Share on Facebook

Tags: Al Sharpton, frances rice, nbra, Obama, racism, Reid, trent lott

Remember, The Republicans Are The Racists

Jan 10, 2010 Political

When Trent Lott made comments to a 100 year old Senator that the country could have avoided all these problems if Thrumond had been elected president in 1948 the left went nuts. There was no indication of what problems he meant or if he meant anything racist by it but the left went nuts. The Chicago Defender published this from Barack Obama on 12 December 2002:

“It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do,” said Obama.

He said: “The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party.” [Highlighted text at source, unknown if it was in original]

Barack Obama was also very hard on Don Imus who, after his off color remark, kissed the ass of every black leader in the country begging for forgiveness. Imus was eventually fired, just like Al Sharpton and Barack Obama wanted.

There are racists in all political parties and there are people who are not racist but make remarks that are deemed offensive. Some are and some are merely blown out of proportion so the left can scream RAAAAAAACCCISSSSSSSST and keep black votes on the Democrat plantation. It also helps Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to stay in business as race baiting poverty pimps.

You can bet that Democrats who say racist things are treated just as badly from the enlightened left. There is NO tolerance for these kinds of people and they are made to pay when they say things that can be racist. Look at Joe Biden. He pulled an Archie Bunker and told us Obama was one of the good ones:

“I mean, you got the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” American Digest

Barack Obama made sure that Joe Biden was removed from his Senate Seat but only by selecting him to be his running mate. Hmmm, Obama went from it being difficult to forgive a guy who made statements that people assumed were racist to selecting a guy who made overtly racist remarks as his running mate. I guess having Joe Biden working around one of the good ones will help reeducate him…

OK Big Dog, Lott was the Senate Majority Leader and Biden just an aged Senator with a propensity for saying stupid things. If Biden had been the Senate Majority Leader then Obama would have found it hard to forgive him and would have called for his resignation.

When Barack Obama was running for the ofice he now holds Harry Reid (the SENATE MAJORITY LEADER) said this:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada described in private then-Sen. Barack Obama as “light skinned” and “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” Obama is the nation’s first African-American president. Yahoo News

Harry Reid apologized for using such offensive language. Negro is such a politically incorrect word that people are up in arms that it is on the Census Form this year even though many blacks asked that it be included and negro is actually a race (technically, African American and Black are not races). Certainly Obama said this could not be forgiven and said that Democrats had to drive Reid from office. He had to have done that because he is post racial, the savior, a fair and even handed politician, one who never plays politics with race and one who demands equal treatment. I know Barack Obama is treating Harry Reid the same way he treated Trent Lott.

OK, just kidding, Obama forgave Reid. It took a matter of minutes for Obama to issue a statement saying he accepted Reid’s apology. It takes Obama months to actually arrive at decisions, a trait his defenders say shows contemplation and intellect and he forgives Reid in minutes. How come he did not deliberate over how it is difficult to accept the apology of a man who uses racist remarks? How come he did not say it is up to Democrats to force Reid from the party? Why did Mr. post racial not hold a member of his own party to the same standard he held the Republican Senate Majority Leader to? Better yet, why has Reid not stepped down? When Lott had his troubles Reid said he had no choice but to step down:

“He had no alternative,” said Reid at the time claiming, “If you tell ethnic jokes in the backroom, it’s that much easier to say ethnic things publicly. I’ve always practiced how I play.” NewsBusters

Of course racism is only a matter of convenience for Democrats. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson routinely engage in anti Semetic remarks and use racial epithets (he called Obama the N word…). They get away with it because they are liberals and liberals can’t be racists, only do-gooders. This is why Hillary was excused when she made a racist remark, why Biden was rewarded with the VP slot and why Reid’s apology was accepted. Democrats can’t be racists, they can only accuse others. Reid will not hold himself to the same standard he held Lott and neither will Obama.

Bill Clinton was hammered on the campaign trail as being racist. I wrote about it at the time and my feeling is if a Republican would be called racist then a Democrat must. Only this time it was other Democrats calling Clinton, their previous hero, a racist. Clinton went nuts because he does not believe himself to be a racist. However, he told Ted Kennedy that Kennedy should support Hillary for president and that “A few years ago, this guy [Obama] would have been getting us coffee.”

I am sure that could be spun a number of ways but it sounds racist and that is the standard that applies to Republicans. The report says Kennedy was angered by this but only because he supported Obama. If he had supported Hillary he would not care. Anger at racism, as has been shown by the above quotes, is situational for Democrats.

So the next time some liberal screams racism just point out these statements and the hypocrisy demonstrated by their side point to this post and tell them to clean their own house first.

The Reid and Clinton stories are from this book. It might be a real good read.

UPDATE: The Washington Times reports that Democrats are defending Harry Reid. That is expected but the funny thing is this part of the story:

Mrs. Feinstein also said that “I saw no Democrats jumping out there and condemning Senator Lott.”

But several Democrats — including Mrs. Feinstein — did in fact target Mr. Lott after his remarks. “This statement casts a dark shadow over Sen. Lott’s ability to be a credible party leader,” she said in 2002, according to an Inland Valley Daily Bulletin news story.

“I can tell you if a Democratic leader said such a thing, they would not be allowed to keep their position,” Sen. Mary Landrieu, Louisiana Democrat, said of Mr. Lott in 2002.

Sen. John Kerry also called on Mr. Lott to resign, saying “I simply do not believe the country can today afford to have someone who has made these statements again and again be the leader of the United States Senate,” according to a Boston Globe article.

Feinstein says that Democrats did not go after Lott when she was one of those who did. The 300 million dollar whore Landrieu says that if a Democrat said such a thing he could not keep his position and Kerry says that the country can not afford to have someone who makes these kinds of statements. Funny how that all changes when it is one of their own…

Share on Facebook

Tags: forgiveness, negro, Obama, racism, Reid

Democrat Transparency Behind Closed Doors

Jan 5, 2010 Political

Henry Waxman and many of the top Democrats have returned to DC to start working on reconciling the House and Senate versions of the health care overhaul. The House does not reconvene until January 12^th and the Senate after that. The reason that these slugs are gathering is so they can work on an end around with the White House.

The House and Senate leaders are working on ways to keep from using the reconciliation process properly to merge the bills. The game will involve bouncing amendments back and forth and working out more back room deals in a fashion that does not allow Republicans to participate and because the normal process would require 60 votes each time the Senate had to vote. They had to bribe a lot of people to get 60 the last time and they do not want to go through that mess again.

This will also allow Pelosi to provide cover for some Democrats in the House but Republicans are not the only ones who are being screwed in this game. Democrats who have certain items they will not waiver on will not be able to ensure what they want is included. Pelosi will likely have the votes she needs and Reid will not have to do anything ethical like follow the Senate rules.

It was Pelosi who promised the most ethical Congress. It was Obama who promised transparency and all Democrats have thrown that word around quite a bit. They were not transparent during the initial work on this disaster and they are even less so now. These slugs are hiding behind closed doors and working on stuff out of the eye of the public.

They are hiding like the cowardly vermin that they are. This is no way to run a government and one can be sure that if the parties were reversed the liberal bloggers and the Democrats would be having a cow and talking about how the process was being hijacked.

Regardless of how one feels about the health care bill there are rules and procedures that must be followed if we are to maintain a legitimate government. This closed door stuff is more in line with Russia, China and a host of other nations that rule in a manner that was never in our design.

The Democrats and their leader Obama have completely shredded the Constitution and the rules that govern the House and Senate. They are hiding like cowards and pushing what they want regardless of the will of the people and regardless of the desires of some of their own members.

Now is the time for a Joe Lieberman to step up and say he will vote against final passage if this is not done properly.

Now, more than ever, we need the Republican to win Ted Kennedy’s seat in this month’s special election. We need these things now because our Republic has been hijacked by a bunch of cutthroat thugs who are moving closer and closer to iron fist rule of the Communists and less in accordance with the Republican form of government we were promised by our Founders and that is clearly spelled out in the Constitution.

I know that the Democrats think losing what they have in numbers is acceptable as long as they get what they want now. That is their choice to make and as foolish as it is, they are moving full steam ahead.

They will have a bloodbath in the next election but are they looking for more than that? Are they begging people to walk into the Capitol and throw them out onto the street and put in place a new government? Are they begging us to overthrow them by force? We have a solemn duty to cast off the bonds of oppressive government. We have a duty to get rid of any government that does not follow the rule of law.

We have elections to do that but it seems as if these morons are begging people to enter the Capitol and kick their asses out.

Nothing would make me happier than seeing them in shackles on a plane to Gitmo but I am content to wait for the next election.

What will come first, the next election or the tipping point?

Source:
US News

Share on Facebook

Tags: constitution, corruption, health care, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, usurping

It Was Obama Who Made The Bogus Claim

Dec 23, 2009 Political

On several occasions Barack Obama has stated that his health care plan would not cover abortions. What he specifically said was that federal dollars (read taxpayer money) would not be used to pay for abortions. Obama said that the people who were saying this were making “bogus” claims:

In a one-line response to charges that taxpayers will foot the bill for abortions, Obama Wednesday night called it a “bogus” claim.

“One more misunderstanding I want to clear up — under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place,” the president said in an address to a joint session of Congress to sell health care reforms. Fox

The bill that the House passed allowed taxpayer money to pay for abortions until a Democrat worked to change the bill. The Senate bill absolutely allows for abortions to be paid for with taxpayer dollars. Representative Bart Stupak, the Democrat who introduced the amendment changing the language in the House bill has read the language in the Senate bill and he says that it is not good enough and that it allows for taxpayer money to fund abortion. He claims that he cannot vote for the bill if the language is changed to the Senate version.

Stupak also claims that he has been contacted by the White House and by House leadership telling him not to make any statements on the issue until they get a chance to sell him the language. In other words, they want to try and buy him off like they did all those Senators but Stupak said he does not need to discuss this with the White House or House leaders because he can read. He indicated that he does not need the language sold to him and that what he has read is not good enough.

Now let’s revisit the statement Obama made about taxpayer money paying for abortions. He said it was a bogus claim. It looks like Obama’s statement that it was a bogus claim was a bogus claim. Obama said that abortions would not be paid for with taxpayer money but the bill will allow that so he made the bogus claim as he has done with a lot of legislation. Remember Mr. “no earmarks” who has signed bills with earmarks totaling around 10,000? There is also no mechanism to keep illegals from getting coverage so when Joe Wilson said “you lie” he was right.

But back to abortion. If the White House wants Stupak not to talk about this it means that they know it exists, that the bill covers abortions and that it would be a problem for some in the House. The request for silence also means they are playing the kind of politics that Obama said he would put an end to. He is trying to get this through without drawing attention to his LIE. The Democrats passed this stuff in the dead of night and now the Obama thugs are trying to keep things hush-hush.

There is still a big chance that this whole thing will go down in flames because it is unlikely that the House and Senate will agree. Of course, there appears to be no such thing as truly moderate Democrats and the only real question is how much do they need to be bought off. I would like to believe that Stupak will stand his ground but recent events involving Democrats indicate that they will stand their ground until their price is reached and then they fold like a bad poker hand.

One thing is for sure. They do not have our best interests in mind. They want to pass something, anything, to make the messiah look good and they don’t care what it has in it.

Their philosophy is to pass something now and then fix it later which is no way to do anything. Would you have faith in a car company if its philosophy was to slap cars together quickly and with little regard to what is right and then worry about fixing them later? Come to think of it, you might have that now that government owns a few car companies…

This will be interesting to watch but it is important for people to remember that the Democrats do not care about getting it right, just getting it passed and Obama will sign whatever hits his desk even if it contains things he said would not be in his plan. Obama and House leaders are anxious to keep certain things quiet so they can pass them without public scrutiny.

This is the most transparent administration in history, just ask them.

Share on Facebook

Tags: abortion, clandestine, deception, lies, Obama, Reid, stupak