Big Dogs House

Democrats Are In Panic Mode In Massachusetts

Jan 10, 2010 Political

US Army veteran and candidate for the US Senate in Massachusetts Scott Brown is causing quite a stir among those in the liberal establishment who believe that the Senate seat in question is “Ted Kennedy’s” seat and that Martha Coakley is the rightful owner of that seat but has yet to go through the formality of an election. Rasmussen found Brown 9 points behind Coakley last week but my liberal commenters discounted this because they say Rasmussen is a shill for Republicans and if -9 is all he could scare up then she is doing OK.

This week finds us using a left wing polling organization, Public Policy Polling, which shows Brown with a 1 point lead which makes this race a toss-up. Brown could certainly lose this election very easily because the Democrats have a lot of tools at their disposal. SEIU is out in full force and supporting Coakley and MoveOn.org is in the mix helping her. Add in ACORN and its criminal activities and we see the shenanigans the left is known for. This is especially true when one considers that Massachusetts is a very blue state and, for some reason, the Kennedys think they own that Senate Seat.

Let me be clear, this seat is not Ted Kennedy’s seat, it belongs to the people. It was the seat held by Kennedy but he did not own it despite what Democrats will have you believe. No one can blame them because Ted Kennedy acted as if he owned the seat. He acted as if he and his Democrats owned both of them. He worked to have the law changed so if John Kerry won the presidency in 2004, Mitt Romney could not appoint a Republican to the seat. There had to be a special election. When Kennedy was near the end of his life he asked the legislature to change the law back so that the now Democrat Governor could appoint a Democrat to fill the seat when Kennedy died. They did that and we are now faced with the typical shenanigans Democrats are known for.

The latest poll shows that Republicans and Independents heavily favor Brown. Coakley has name recognition and has a lot of liberal support but many folks are unhappy with the health care reform being rammed through Congress. Most folks who supported Kennedy’s dream of universal health care do not believe what is going through Congress is anything close to what he wanted. Democrats are less enthusiastic about this election and the youth will likely not be out in force like it was in 2008.

Republicans and Independents are fired up and the seniors are always a reliable voting block. This is going to mean trouble for Ms. Coakley but she still has 9 days to get the SEIU and ACORN bandits out to work some magic.

The Weekly Standard says the poll is likely to spur the Democrat machine to get busy in Massachusetts and that is spot on.

Democrats have already begun contingency plans in case Brown wins. The state of Massachusetts must wait 10 days after a federal election for absentee and military ballots. The state will wait to certify even if there is no mathematical possibility for Brown to lose because of these ballots. The state plans to delay signing the election certification as long as it can so that the interim appointment can vote on the health care bill in the Senate. The Democrats have a plan to delay the duly elected Senator from Massachusetts if that person happens to be a Republican. If Coakley wins she will likely be certified very quickly and sworn in as soon as humanly possible.

These Democrats are the same ones who whined about Al Franken even though he was involved in a legal recount. These Democrats are the ones who want people in DC and sworn in immediately when they are Democrats. These people are showing the American public exactly how underhanded and unethical they are. They are willing to thwart the will of the people in Massachusetts in order to get what they want. As Gateway Pundit reports, Democrats are stripping amendments that Republicans had put in the bills and that were approved. They are unethical and will do what they want regardless of what it means.

If Brown wins it will be a clear sign that NO ONE is safe. If a Republican wins in Massachusetts it will be another shot heard round the world and will signal that Democrats are in real trouble. But it will also tell them to ram as much as they can now because it will be their last chance.

We need Scott Brown to win. The lawyers can work on what happens after in order to get him in the Senate. All of it will be moot if Brown loses so you folks in Massachusetts need to elect Scott Brown in order to stop the run away government.

Remember folks, the same government that is running TSA and Homeland Security wants to run your health care.

Others:
Riehl World View
Big Government shows exactly how they will obtain power and push in universal health care. Be very careful of what you let these people do. THIS IS A MUST READ.
Wall Street Journal – Where America Ranks Number One In Health Care
HillBuzz talks about the Democrats refusal to seat Brown should he win. The word is people will set up an office for Brown on the Capitol steps if they have to. Screw that. If they will not seat him I say we enter the Capitol by force of arms and PUT him in his office. If they want to play hardball let’s show them what hardball is.

Share on Facebook

Tags: corruption, deception, health care, lies, martha coakley, Obama, scott brown, senate vote, ted kennedy

The Lion Sleeps Tonight

Aug 26, 2009 Political

Senator Edward Kennedy died of brain cancer last evening at the age of 77. Kennedy served in the Senate for 47 years and was the champion of liberal causes. His family name helped propel him to national spotlight and his personal failings prevented him from reaching higher political office.

I never cared for Kennedy or his politics but now is not the time to discuss political differences so if you comment I ask that you put aside partisan differences and be respectful. As Michelle Malkin put it:

There is a time and place for political analysis and criticism. Not now.

Yes, there will be a nauseating excess of MSM hagiographies and lionizations — and crass calls to pass the health care takeover to memorialize his death.

That’s no excuse to demonstrate the same lack of restraint in the other direction. Not now.

My friends at Stop the ACLU have a reminder about what mom always said; “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.”

While I respect all opinions, crass comments about his death will be deleted. I don’t expect people to praise him and certainly understand that sentiment. That is why mom’s wise words are here as a reminder.

The thoughts and prayers of the Big Dog family go out to those grieving for Sentaor Kennedy.

UPDATE: Eric at Tygrrrr Express has a very good post up discussing Kennedy. It gives Kennedy props for something he did and I agree with the sentiment.

Share on Facebook

Tags: death, Obama, Senate, ted kennedy, vacancy

Boston Globe Is Right, Kennedy Should Resign

Aug 24, 2009 Political

Jeff Jacoby has a great article up at the Boston Globe indicating that Ted Kennedy should resign his seat in the Senate.

Kennedy is asking the Massachusetts legislature to pass a bill that allows the Governor to appoint Senators should their seats become vacant. This is very convenient since Kennedy’s seat will be vacant when he eventually succumbs to his terminal brain cancer.

However, Kennedy is the reason that the Governor cannot appoint successors. When Romney, a Republican, was Governor and John Kerry was running for the presidency Ted Kennedy asked the legislature to pass a bill requiring a special election in the event of a Senate vacancy. He did this to prevent Romney from being able to appoint a Republican to the seat, should Kerry have won. Ted Kennedy was instrumental in having the rules changed from what he now wants them to be.

You see, there is now a Democrat in the State House and Kennedy is using this lame excuse of saying people of Massachusetts deserve to have two votes in the Senate and the delay of a special election will keep them from having just that.

Too fricking bad.

Kennedy was not worried about having two votes when he asked for the law to be changed last time. He was only concerned about keeping the seat in the hands of the Democrats. I understand the partisan politics but let’s not pretend that this is all about having two votes for the state because it is not.

As Jacoby points out, Kennedy has missed all but a handful of Senate votes this year so Massachusetts does not have two votes even with the seat occupied.

Jacoby goes on to point out that if Kennedy is really concerned about the two votes he should resign so that he can be replaced and put the second vote back in the Senate.

For well over a year, Massachusetts has not had the “two voices . . . and two votes in the Senate’’ that Kennedy says its voters are entitled to. Sickness has kept him away from Capitol Hill for most of the last 15 months. He has missed all but a handful of the 270 roll-calls taken in the Senate so far this year. Through no fault of his own, he is unable to carry out the job he was reelected to in 2006. As a matter of integrity, he should bow out and allow his constituents to choose a replacement. Boston Globe

The problem with this thinking is that Jacoby indicates that Kennedy should step down “as a matter of integrity.”

Ted Kennedy had NO integrity. If he did he would not try to push for changes to the law that circumvent the democratic process of allowing the people to put a person in office. If Kennedy had integrity he would have resigned after his diagnosis and an election would have already taken place.

Kennedy has a career that is nothing but a lack of integrity.

Of course this would be a moot point if the Constitution had not been changed. Senators were appointed by state legislatures until the Constitution was amended.

That was a mistake.

Share on Facebook

Tags: cancer, integrity, resign, ted kennedy

Ted Kennedy Speaks Out

Jul 20, 2009 Political

No, not about Mary Jo Kopechne, who he murdered 40 years ago, but about health care in the US. Kennedy took to the pages of NewsWEAK to lay out his vision for universal health care. Obama and the Democrats are pulling out all the stops because this bill is on life support and is losing the support of Democrats as each day passes by.

While Kennedy uses the piece to lay out the position, one which he says he fought for for the past four decades, the message is still the same misleading information coming out of the White House. Kennedy claims that people will be able to keep what they have and that everyone will be required to have health insurance.

The first thing to realize is that the bill is loaded with language that prevents people from having their own insurance. All plans must meet the standards set by the government and if anything in the plan changes (like a co-pay) then the plan will not be legal. The entire system is designed to move people away from private insurance and to government run health care. The cost of this plan will be in the trillions of dollars and this is to provide health care to the 12 million or so people who genuinely cannot afford it.

As for the estimated 47 million not covered by health insurance, 20 million can afford to buy it, according to a study by former CBO Director June O’Neill. Most of the other 27 million are single and under 35, with as many as a third illegal aliens.

When it’s all whittled down, as few as 12 million are unable to buy insurance — less than 4% of a population of 305 million. For this we need to nationalize 17% of our nation’s $14 trillion economy and change the current care that 89% like? IBD

This amounts to nothing more than greater government control over our lives. People should be able to decide whether or not they want insurance and if they incur a medical bill they should be required to pay it. There are consequences to actions and deciding not to have health care coverage can have drastic consequences. As for those who cannot afford it, there are plenty of government plans already designed to help them.

The push by Kennedy is the latest in the saga of dwindling support. Democrats are abandoning this plan because it is costly and those who live in more conservative districts are worried about reelection. Obama and the supporters of this debacle want it passed quickly because the longer it festers the less support it has from the public. Rasmussen has a poll showing support has dwindled to 35% with 50% opposing.

Government run health care will concern itself with costs and not coverage. There is a valid argument that private insurance does the same thing. If government regulations requiring certain coverages were removed and if people were allowed to shop across state lines then there would be more competition which would help keep costs down and force companies to provide more coverage. If the government is involved there are no such worries. The government will not pay all the taxes that insurance companies pay (and if they go out of business where will that revenue come from) and the government can raise taxes when it needs more money. This will eventually hit the pockets of middle class Americans and it will lead to rationing and denial of care to those the government deems too costly to treat. A provision in the bill requires the elderly to be counseled on end of life care:

One troubling provision of the House bill compels seniors to submit to a counseling session every five years (and more often if they become sick or go into a nursing home) about alternatives for end-of-life care (House bill, p. 425-430). The sessions cover highly sensitive matters such as whether to receive antibiotics and “the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.”

This mandate invites abuse, and seniors could easily be pushed to refuse care. Do we really want government involved in such deeply personal issues? New York Post

Some of these decisions are valid and people go through them everyday but they should be the ones taking care of this. Government does not belong this involved. The NYP piece highlights many areas of the bill that people should find troubling.

As the Democrats pull out all stops to pass this monstrosity it is important to note that the vote on an amendment to require all members who vote for it, their staff and family members to sign up for the care was opposed by almost all the Democrats. They want it for you but it is not good enough for them. They work for us and they need to remember it. If they do not want it then we should not be forced to take it. At least they have a vote in the matter as it affects them. We have no such luxury.

The Democrats are running ads targeting their own in areas where their members of Congress, who oppose the bill, reside. The ads are aimed at the members of Congress which means the leadership knows this is in trouble. They are willing to risk losing seats in 2010 in order to hang this boat anchor around our necks.

Ted Kennedy has pushed himself away from the bar long enough to have his speechwriter pen the article describing why this is important and to garner support. On the 40th anniversary of the murder he committed, Kennedy is now trying to murder the American health care system.

As has been the case for the last 4 decades, Mary Jo Kopechne is unavailable for comment.

Share on Facebook

Tags: blue dogs, health care, Obama, ted kennedy, travesty