Saturday, October 31, 2009

Ethics and The Democrat Culture of Corruption

We've been reading a great deal about ethics and we'd assert that the Democrat Party has real problems although there are certainly some Republican scumbags as well. We get a daily review of the most popular articles that our friends at the Washington Post publishes and were struck by the number of ethics articles in the top 10, eight. We thought we'd share those from yesterday with you below (You can check these out by clicking on the headline):

Most Viewed Articles in Politics

1) Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry
House ethics investigators have been scrutinizing the activities of more than 30 lawmakers and several aides in inquiries about issues including defense lobbying and corporate influence peddling, according to a confidential House ethics committee report prepared in July.
7 on defense panel scrutinized
Nearly half the members of a powerful House subcommittee in control of Pentagon spending are under scrutiny by ethics investigators in Congress, who have trained their lens on the relationships between seven panel members and an influential lobbying firm founded by a former Capitol Hill aide.
Rangel: Ethics talks unrelated to personal finance issues
House ethics committee investigators have interviewed Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.), the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee whose personal finances have been under investigation for more than a year, a committee document from July reveals.
Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry
House ethics investigators have been scrutinizing the activities of more than 30 lawmakers and several aides in inquiries about issues including defense lobbying and corporate influence peddling, according to a confidential House ethics committee report prepared in July.
Ethics panel eyes Caribbean trip taken by members of Congressional Black Caucus
After receiving a referral from the Office of Congressional Ethics, the House ethics committee announced in June that it would create an investigative subcommittee to look into "officially connected travel in 2007 and 2008 that was sponsored, funded or organized by an organization known as Carib...
Ethics office reviewed tax records of four House members
The Office of Congressional Ethics reviewed the tax records of at least four House members this year, after news reports suggested that they had received tax credits from Maryland for declaring their homes in the state to be their primary residences. The office appears to have ended its analysis...
Sanchez sisters eyed by House ethics panel for alleged collusion
A document from the House ethics committee lists an examination into whether the chamber's rules were violated when Rep. Linda T. Sanchez put three legislative aides to her fellow-congresswoman sister on her payroll after an embezzlement scheme had left Rep. Loretta Sanchez's office short of fund...
House subcommittee created to investigate Rep. Maxine Waters
The House ethics committee announced Thursday afternoon that it had voted to establish a subcommittee to investigate Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), who is under scrutiny for her ties to a bank that received federal bailout money.

Add to this yet another one of the most popularly viewed articles from yesterday:
6) Rep. Shuler's land swap deal eyed by Ethics committee
House ethics investigators are reviewing an allegation of "preferential treatment" in a land deal involving (D-N.C.), a former Washington Redskins quarterback, according to a July committee document obtained by The Washington Post.

Fair and Honest Criticism of Republican Senator Hutchison on Earmarks

In our effort to be fair and honest and not incur the wrath of Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama and his White House comrades we'll share a little shame on a Republican Senator whom we've generally liked although she has certainly become more controversial as she attempts to become governor of Texas, Kay Baily Hutchinson. We don't like earmarks so we are in total accord with Citizens Against Government Waste in their criticism of her and her earmarks. At least, to our knowledge, she isn't one of the many who is under investigation for selling their earmarks for campaign contributions. Anyway, here is what our friends at Citizens Against Government Waste has to say:

Porker of the Month: Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison
"Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) has named Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) Porker of the Month for loading up her goodie bag just before Halloween as she prepares to leave the Senate to run for governor of Texas. While claiming to be a fiscal conservative, the four-term senator requested 149 pork-barrel projects costing $1.6 billion in authorization and appropriations bills for fiscal year 2010. On September 28, 2009, she told the Austin American-Statesman, “I’m proud of being able to garner Texans’ fair share of their tax dollars.” “Sen. Hutchison is repeating the same old insidious quackery about the earmarking process: that it can be made accountable and that it somehow levels the spending playing field,” said CAGW President Tom Schatz. “The only fair way to distribute the taxpayers’ money is to eliminate the practice altogether and instead work to ensure that every dime of taxpayer money is spent using the budget laws and rules that [members of Congress] themselves established.” For personifying the tiresome hypocrisy of some members of Congress who want to claim the badge of fiscal conservatism while continuing to abscond with billions of dollars in wasteful pork projects, CAGW names Sen. Hutchison the October Porker of the Month.
Read more about the Porker of the Month. "

Health Care -- Who Do You Believe?

Okay, for you liberal readers, this comes from someone we respect and someone you probably don't. Too bad. When it comes to Queen Nancy's health care bill, we tend to believe Republican Congressman Mike Pence. Here is what he has to point out about the bill:

October 29, 2009

"In order to assist Members, staff, and interested parties seeking to read and review the health “reform” legislation (H.R. 3962) introduced by House Democrats, the Republican Conference has compiled a list of important page numbers and provisions in the 1,990-page “
Affordable Health Care for America Act:”

Page 94—Section 202(c) prohibits the sale of private individual health insurance policies, beginning in 2013, forcing individuals to purchase coverage through the federal government

Page 110—Section 222(e) requires the use of federal dollars to fund abortions through the government-run health plan—and, if the Hyde Amendment were ever not renewed, would require the plan to fund elective abortions

Page 111—Section 223 establishes a new board of federal bureaucrats (the “Health Benefits Advisory Committee”) to dictate the health plans that all individuals must purchase—and would likely require all Americans to subsidize and purchase plans that cover any abortion

Page 211—Section 321 establishes a new government-run health plan that, according to non-partisan actuaries at the H
ULewin GroupUH, would cause as many as 114 million Americans to lose their existing coverage

Page 225—Section 330 permits—but does not require—Members of Congress to enroll in government-run health care

Page 255—Section 345 includes language requiring verification of income for individuals wishing to receive federal health care subsidies under the bill—while the bill includes a requirement for applicants to verify their citizenship, it does not include a similar requirement to verify applicants’ identity, thus encouraging identity fraud for undocumented immigrants and others wishing to receive taxpayer-subsidized health benefits

Page 297—Section 501 imposes a 2.5 percent tax on all individuals who do not purchase “bureaucrat-approved” health insurance—the tax would apply on individuals with incomes under $250,000, thus breaking a central H
UpromiseUH of then-Senator Obama’s presidential campaign

Page 313—Section 512 imposes an 8 percent “tax on jobs” for firms that cannot afford to purchase “bureaucrat-approved” health coverage; according to an H
UanalysisUH by Harvard Professor Kate Baicker, such a tax would place millions “at substantial risk of unemployment”—Uwith minority workers losing their jobs at twice the rate of their white counterparts

Page 336—Section 551 imposes additional job-killing taxes, in the form of a half-trillion dollar “surcharge,” more than half of which will hit small businesses; according to a model developed by President Obama’s senior economic advisor, such taxes could cost up to 5.5 million jobs

Page 520—Section 1161 cuts more than $150 billion from Medicare Advantage plans, potentially jeopardizing millions of seniors’ existing coverage

Page 733—Section 1401 establishes a new Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research; the bill includes no provisions preventing the government-run health plan from using such research to deny access to life-saving treatments on cost grounds, similar to Britain’s National Health Service, which denies patient treatments costing more than £35,000

Page 1174—Section 1802(b) includes provisions entitled “TAXES ON CERTAIN INSURANCE POLICIES” to fund comparative effectiveness research, breaking Speaker Pelosi’s promise that “UWe will not be taxing [health] benefits in any bill that passes the HouseU,” and the President’s promise not to raise taxes on families with incomes under $250,000"

Hopefully, this bill or a conference committee version of this will never see enactment.

More T.A.R.P. Funds Down the Drain

From the Washington Post this morning,

"NEW YORK -- CIT Group, a major lender to small businesses, is preparing to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection as early as this weekend, sources familiar with the matter said Friday, which would likely wipe out the federal government's $2.3 billion stake in the company.

"A CIT bankruptcy filing would be one of the largest in U.S. history, with potentially broad ripple effects. The firm provides loans to about 1 million companies, including many already struggling in the economic downturn."

Well, it's only $2.3 Billion of YOUR MONEY. Enough said.

For more on this:

Friday, October 30, 2009

Dismantling America, Continued

Worth a read is Thomas Sowell's column today, 'Dismantling America Part II' at:

Dirty Harry and David Broder, Just Liberals and Wimps

One of the columnists we'd don't often read reinforces are inclination. David S. Broder, who we believe is simply a beltway liberal has an interesting piece today aimed at Dirty Harry Reid and the 'optional' public option that would let states opt out. While the column says a lot about Reid and his wimpy motivations, it also reinforces our belief that for the most part conservatives might just as well avoid the liberal sermonizing of Beltway Broder.

You may actually be amused by, 'Damaging Options for Liberals' at:

Ethics in Congress?

The news today is about a leaked document from the Office of Congressional Ethics which indicates a whole bunch of your congress folks who are being investigated for their earmark trading for contributions. Maybe we should call this 'EarmarkGate'. It was known that the House ethics committee was looking in to this since they were embarrassed into doing so back in June.

In a Washington Post article today, 'Dozens in Congress Under Ethics Inquiry', the Post notes that more than 30 Congressmen are being investigate by the Office of Congressional Ethics. You can read this at:

But even more revealing of the essentially 'Democrat Culture of Corruption' is an analysis done in a separate article by the Post, '7 on Defense Panel Scrutinized' which you can find at:

There are a lot of familiar names here such as PMA, John Murtha, James Moran, Peter Visclosky. Yes, there are a couple of Republicans here as well but none so prominent and so linked to selling earmarks for campaign contributions and favors as Murtha, Moran and Visclosky.

Our bet is that Queen Nancy Pelosi will make sure these investigations go as slowly as possible and result in hand slaps rather than the deserved punishment of censure or expulsion from the House. Only the constituents of these crooks will really be able to appropriate reward these crooks by voting them out of office and then seeing that they are prosecuted for their misdeeds.

The Congressional Budget Office Sends Rangel Mail

If you would like to see the actual letter/analysis of HR 3962, the House version of health reform, sent by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to the tax-evading I.R.S. cheat, Representative Charlie Rangel, you can do so by clicking the link below. You'd need to be an accountant to fully analyze the numbers but you can be sure even if they only increase the deficit by $894 billion (a billion here a billion there) over 10 years by CBO estimates that congress well do much more that hides the real numbers, ie., the Senates latest failed attempt to hide $250 billion of spending increases for Medicare and Medicaid.

We'll see how these numbers change with the Senate version and ultimately with the monstrosity 'conference' bill should things reach that point which they likely well.

This is still a terrible idea that will ultimately result in huge budget deficits (check out LBJ's Medicare projections), control of 17% of our economy and life and death choices made by bureaucrats.

Here's the CBO letter:

Government Control Potpourri

There were several articles in the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday that caught our attention. But rather than opine on each one separately we thought we'd address them all at once since the overall theme dealt with big government largess and control of our lives.

First, we'd call your attention to a front-page below the fold news article about how our elected officials are trying to influence a number of our newly minted 'state controlled' enterprises. Government Motors, excuse us, General Motors seems to be getting a lot of attention from our senators and congressmen who after basically allowing a legitimate creditors to be wiped out by a new interpretation of the bankruptcy laws now want to help it make decisions that will in our opinion only accelerate the ultimate demise of the company along with some $60 billion or so of your tax dollars. You can read this, 'Politicians Butt In at Bailed-Out GM' at:

The next one that caught our eye was one about our Pay Czar Kenneth Feinberg's testimony before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. There is an oxymoron for sure. Anyway, after deciding what executives of some of the largest companies could be paid, he testified that he didn't want to expand his control to other companies as some are suggesting. It can't be easy trying to decide what to do about executive salaries of companies that only exist because of your tax dollar bail-outs. How do you balance decisions between free enterprise, the relative value of executives and the fact that you are alive only because of TARP funds? Actually, we think that would require little balancing to begin with had these companies just been allowed to fail legitimately and gone through legitimate bankruptcy proceedings. You can read this article, 'Pay Czar Tells House Panel He Want No Wider Authority' at:

Lastly, we opined earlier this week about the $8,000 first-time home buyer's credit and noted the fraud that seems to be occurring with it. This program was to expire in November but apparently some of your leaders in Washington want to extend it or even broaden it even with the fraud that has transpired. The Wall Street Journal has a good opinion editorial, 'First-time Fraudsters' that is worth your read at:
Were we discussing any of these issues two years ago it would have been inconceivable. Certainly our Founding Fathers must be turning over in their graves. The Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama, Dirty Harry and Czarina Pelosi and associates have indeed brought change but certainly not hope to our country......And, having brought this change to you they now want to seize 17% of what's left of the economy by taking control of your health care dollars and your health care decisions.....

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Failed GOP Traitor Hagel Gets An Appointment by the Commissar With Pay Reflecting His Worth

Yesterday we learned from the Douglas Street Rag that Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama has named former, failed, un-re-electable, every thing's Vietnam, pro-Obama heath care, Senator Chuckie Hagel as co-chair of the President's Intelligence Advisor Board. Apparently, Chuckie's failure to support fellow Vietnam veteran John McCain, the presidential nominee of his own party last year, while giving lip service to his new mentor Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama,
having his wife write checks and his former chief of staff endorse same has qualified Chuckie for this 'esteemed' position.

We think this says a lot about Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Barack Hussein Obama and 'please let me be something important' Chuck Hagel. It shows just plain bad judgement on the president's part since Chuck will never be a team player which the president badly needs. It also shows how much Chuckie's opinion is worth since he, fortunately for us, isn't being paid.

The Real Costs of Healthcare Reform

There's a very revealing editorial in yesterday's Wall Street Journal, "The WellPoint Revelation." With the 'unveiling' of the House Health Care Bill by Czarina Pelosi today, it is even more relevant to look at the facts. You should read this at:

Anne Batchelder, Nebraska Legend, Passes

We at the Objective Conservative are very sad to report that former Republican National Committee Woman and outstanding citizen Anne Batchelder passed away yesterday. Many on our staff knew Anne, some for many years, and she was a pillar of Republicanism. She was inspirational for many and, in fact, The Anne Batchelder Excellence in Public Service Series, an organization dedicated to further the political development of Nebraska Republican women was dedicated in her name.

Here is how the Anne Batchelder Excellence in Public Service Series describes Anne:

"Anne Stuart Batchelder settled in Omaha, Nebraska in 1945. After a career with the American Red Cross as a club mobile driver in the European Theatre of Operations, she served in England, France, Belgium, Holland and Germany. While in Germany, she met and married her husband, Lt. Col. Clifton Batchelder.

"Anne served on numerous boards and foundations including: Brownell-Talbot School, Omaha Public Library, Methodist Hospital Foundation, Uta-Halle Home for Girls and the Hastings College Foundation. Anne was a long time board member of the Midland Chapter of the Boys Scouts, the National Federation of Republican Women, a Director for the Omaha National Bank and a member of the Board of Trustees, an Elder and a Clerk of Session for her church.

"Anne has always had a keen interest in Republican politics. Serving as Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Nebraska Republican Party, National Committee Woman, Finance Chairman for Bush/Quayle and nominee for Lt. Governor as well as helping many Republican candidates throughout Nebraska. She has attended the last thirteen Republican conventions as a delegate or alternate delegate and was inducted into the National Republican Party Hall of Fame in 1984."

Here is the obituary from today's World-Herald:

"Anne Stuart Batchelder:
Share E-mail Visit Guest Book
Batchelder, Anne StuartJan 11, 1920 - Oct 28, 2009Omaha. Predeceased by her husband, Clifton "Batch" Batchelder; parents, Douglas and Harriet Stuart, Lake Forest, IL. Survived by her siblings, Robert D. (Lillan) Stuart and Margaret (Augustin) Hart, Lake Forest, IL and Harriet (Edson) Spencer, Wayzatta, MN; children, Edward S. (Ann) Batchelder and Anne S. (Peyton T. Jr. ) Pratt, Omaha, Mary (Tom) Bequette, Kennard, NE and Lucia Batchelder (Bob Bell), Colorado Springs, CO. Also survived by grandchildren, Elizabeth (Tim) Howell, Susan, Anne, Michael and Peter Batchelder, Peyton T. (Jody) Pratt III, Rebecca (Stan) Fischer, Jennifer (Andy) Letter, Mathew and Margaret Patterson and Andy Pamp and Anne (Jon) Campbell; great-grandchildren: Mary and Grover Howell, Preston and Peyton Fischer, Evelyn and Thomas Letter.SERVICES Monday, 11am, Dundee Presbyterian Church, 5312 Underwood. Interment, Forest Lawn Memorial Park. Memorials to Hastings College, Uta Halee Girls Village, Dundee Presbyterian Church or Methodist Hospital. The family will receive friends Sunday, 3pm-5pm at the West Center Chapel. HEAFEY-HEAFEY-HOFFMANNDWORAK-CUTLERWEST CENTER CHAPEL78th & West Center 391-3900"

Anne was a contributor to not just Republcian politics but a community leader and an inspiration to many. We will miss her but the memory of her dedication to her country, state and community will live on and continue to inspire many.

Tom White and Nebraska Democrats Support Pelosi, Reid Healthcare Plan

We received an e-mail criticizing Congressman Terry and the bill he introduce on health care from our liberal friends at the 'New Nebraska Network' which is run by a functionary of the Nebraska Democrat Party. They are great at criticizing Terry for any number of reasons, but what they fail to mention is that apparently, by his appearance at a activist rally last week supporting the Democrat plan (what ever that will ultimately be other than bad), Terry's opponent Tom White is supporting the the take over of 17% of the national economy and government control over your health decisions.

Democrats and Tom White can criticize Terry's plan, but their's is pretty simple--whatever Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed and Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Barack Hussein Obama want.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Ben Nelson's Pledge

For those of you who forgot, one Governor E. Benjamin Nelson once signed a pledge back in 1994 during his re-election campaign stating he wouldn't run for any other office until he had completed his term if re-elected. E. Benjamin forgot that pledge and ran for the U.S. Senate in 1996 and lost. The breaking of his pledge was an instrumental reason for his loss.

The last time E. Benjamin Nelson ran for office, in 2006 against Pete Ricketts, he signed a pledge for Americans For Tax Reform saying he would not vote for any tax increases. Clearly, if Senator Nelson votes for any of the health insurance bills likely to come out of a conference committee he will be voting for a tax increase and BREAKING ANOTHER PLEDGE.

Nebraskans may be forgiving, but they don't forget. And 2012 is not that far away and it seems Ben likes life on the Beltway, not to mention the publicity his 'independent' status gives him.

If E. Benjamin Nelson wants a chance at a third term, he should remember that Pledge.

While Obama Fiddles, Americans Die

With the recent deaths of American soldiers, the American death toll for the war in Afghanistan is now right at 900. While Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama considers his options (of retreat in face of public polling) and attends $30,000+ fundraisers across the country while trying to confiscate 17% of the American economy, our men and women are dying in Afghanistan and the future of any stability there or in Pakistan is dwindling.

They say Nero fiddled while Rome burned. Well, that's what the Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Barack Hussein Obama is doing today. It's time to quit fiddling and time to make the tough decisions he was elected to do. Forget those folks in Oslo.

A Direction for the GOP

Tony Blankley has a thoughtful piece, 'GOP Must Not Vote 'Present' on Our Future' which offers some good thoughts about what direction the Republican Party might consider over the next 12 months. We'd recommend you check it out at:

Senator Inhofe, the Troglodyte

Yesterday, Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) got pretty battered by the likes of Senators Kerry and Boxer in a Senate Environmental Committee Hearing over global warming. Seems that Inhofe is the only troglodyte left in the Capitol who refuses to accept conversion to the Global Warming Church of Al Gore.

We opined much in the past that the 'Global Warming' issue has become a cottage industry for many and certainly for those in the media who by the way are 80% liberal and feed on the liberal pablum fed them by their heroes in the Beltway. These pseudo-scientists simply want to seize the energy portion of the economy after they complete the nationalization of your health care. Unmoved and ignorant of the ramifications of their efforts to cleanse the world of CO2 they will make the United States an oasis of green while they drive jobs away from our country in an inane effort to cure a problem that doesn't exist and one that, even if it did, they have no hope of solving as the rest of the world gives lip service and continues its unrestricted emissions of the gas.

But enough of this, for his standing up to these global climate increase zealots we nominate Senator Inhofe as our November Hero of the Month.

Rogert's Boat Business or How to Avoid Taxes

Yesterday, we wrote about Nebraska State Senator Kent Rogert's 'boat business.' Anyone who believes the fabricated tale of Rogert on his failure to pay sales tax on a boat he has owned 'as a dealer' for six years and as a 'dealer' been unable to sell must believe in the tooth fairy.

Clearly, Rogert who has been enjoying the use of the boat for these last six years simply got the 'dealer' registration to avoid paying sales tax on his purchase. If he wanted to sell it he would have had plenty of time to do so during 'good times.' He didn't. And what kind of dealer holds on to a depreciating asset for six years, using it and waiting for the market to improve?

Rogert has provided a number of mixed and ambiguous answers to reporters including Joe Jordan and those from the Omaha and Lincoln papers. He says he's sold less than 10 boats since getting his dealer registration and that he didn't make enough to report on his Accountability and Disclosure forms. We wonder if he ever reported any sales on his Federal or State Income Tax? We certainly hope that the state and federal revenue authorities are looking into this since we smell not only sales tax evasion but also income tax evasion.

Rogert seems to be taking his tax evasion cues from U.S. House Ways and Means Chairman Rangel, a big-time tax evader.

We sure hope that the tax authorities, state and federal, the county treasurers of Burt and Douglas County, the legislature and the Attorney General and the State Patrol look into Senator Rogert's tax-evading boat business.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Steve Lathrop a Target of the Nebraska GOP

Talking about State Senators (see below), the Nebraska Republican Party put out a door-hanger
piece in Legislative District 12 about "State Senator Steve Lathrop and His Spending." Looks like the NE GOP is going after Lathrop. Apparently, they have a stealth candidate that will soon be complicating Lathrop's run for re-election and this time, unlike his first run, he won't be able to claim that he's really a conservative. Here's what it said:

State Senator Steve Lathrop = More Government Spending

While Nebraska families are struggling in these difficult economic times, what was Steve Lathrop's solution?


In the midst of one of the greatest economic crises since the Great Depression, what was Steve Lathrop fighting for?

Nearly $100 MILLION in additional government spending.

Next time you see State Senator Steve Lathrop, tell him his out of control spending hurts Nebraska.

Don't you think you deserve better from your Senator?

Paid for by the Nebraska Republican Party, 1610 N Street, Lincoln, NE 68508,

State Senator Kent Rogert, A Tax-Cheat?

We do read other blogs and occasionally we find an item of interest. One that came to us recently is Joe Jordan's Nebraska Watchdog piece on State Senator Kent Rogert of Tekamah, Nebraska. Seems that the state senator lied, yes lied, about being a boat dealer when he purchased a $40,000 boat back in 2002 and avoided sales tax on the boat by saying he was a dealer. Of course, our boat dealer state senator has continued to register his boat in different counties since as he apparently continues to try to sell his pleasure craft which he apparently forces himself to use weekly during the summer, no doubt to keep the battery charged.

Rogert is just another scumbag politician who apparently wants to pass laws that affect you while he doesn't believe in following the ones on the book.

The legislature and Nebraska's Attorney General Jon Bruning should be looking into this. And Joe Jordan gets our congrats for exposing Rogert.

Destroying America

A good column today by Thomas Sowell who concludes that, " Whether enough people will wake up in time to keep America from being dismantled, piece by piece, is another question-- and the biggest question for this generation."

It's a good synopsis of what Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama is trying to do and has attempted to do in the nearly 280 days of his nascent reign. You can check it out at:

Monday, October 26, 2009

Standing Up for Conservative Principles in New York

We aren't exactly of the mind that Sarah Palin has much of a future other than in raising money for Republicans and writing books, but we must congratulate her for standing up for 'conservative' values in her endorsement of Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman over 'Republican' candidate Dede Scozzafava in the upcoming Congressional election in New York District 23. At least Palin, unlike the Republican Party in her state, can tell the difference between a conservative and a downright liberal RINO (Republican in Name Only).

We would like to see a Republican surge and although we certainly don't expect 2010 to give them a majority in the House, it would be nice to see 20 seats or so gained. One of those seats certainly wouldn't be more than a RINO one if Scozzafava wins the special election next month.

Sometimes its better to fall on your sword over principle than simply.
With that said, we are making Palin our October Hero of the Month and suggesting you read 'The GOP's New York Fiasco', printed in the Wall Street Journal at:

Democrats + Lobbiests + Campaign Donations = Corruption

There is an interesting article in today's Washington Post by Paul Kane and Carol D. Leonnig, 'A Congressman, A Lobbying Firm and a Swift Path to Earmarks which delves into Representative Peter Visclosky (D-Indiana) and his relationship with a lobbying firm, K & L Gates. Somehow the Gates firm seems to get very quick and successful results in the form of earmarks from Visclosky and in return somehow Visclosky gets large amounts of contributions sometimes before, sometimes after the earmarks are approved.

According to the 'Post', "Much of the public focus in the investigation has been on PMA Group, a former lobbying powerhouse that won $299 million in earmarks in the past two years from the defense panel -- $34 million of it directly from Visclosky. Visclosky's pattern of help for K&L Gates clients has not been previously disclosed."

We've suggested in the past that whether it be Republicans (and there are plenty of them that are probably as bad) or whether it be Democrats like poster boy Murtha and ascending Viclosky that earmarks are just wrong for the odor they create particularly when they are tainted by suspect lobbying firms and contemporaneous campaign donations. Such is the case here.

Oh, we think Visclosky deserves to be our October Hall of Shame Nominee.

No to Council on Street Naming - Patrick McPherson

For many reasons, naming a street or any other government owned property after former Mayor Fahey, or former Mayor Daub, or any former living mayor or office holder is a bad idea without an objective, rational and fair process.

In the case of Mike Fahey, he has barely been out of office for 120 days. He continues to be involved in Omaha politics, Democrat politics and many other community activities. Fahey may not plan on running for office, but he certainly could in the future and having any city owned property named after him could very well be seen as a tacit, if not overt, endorsement. A case in point is that former Mayor P.J. Morgan is now a candidate for the Douglas County Board.

It is frankly much too soon to evaluate Fahey’s overall contributions to the City. Certainly, he deserves credit for his work in securing the twenty-five year contract with the NCAA for the College World Series and certainly the new stadium, which he helped promote, will be a great addition to downtown. However, not all Omahans are happy with it, with its cost, with the fact that they didn’t get a chance to vote on whether to construct it, or with the demise of Rosenblatt.
One might argue that had it not been for former Mayor Daub’s hard fought efforts to clean up this area, build the Qwest Center and redevelop the riverfront and much of downtown that former Mayor Fahey would never have had an opportunity to construct the CWS Stadium and obtain a long-term contract.

The city’s current financial dilemma also brings into question the appropriateness of naming a street after Fahey. Many in the community believe that much of the city’s financial problems stem from Fahey’s administration. For this and the reasons noted above, many citizens rightly question the rationale for such a naming initiative.

Beyond the above, one can’t help but wonder what the motivations of Creighton’s Father Schlegel and Union Pacific Chairman Young are in proposing this idea? One could speculate a great deal about potential motivations and certainly many in the community are doing so.

However, this isn’t meant to demean the former Mayor.

What is important here is the process—whether it is naming something for former Mayor Fahey, or for that matter naming something for former Mayor Daub which has been suggested by others as a reaction of surprise to the proposal to rename Webster Street for Fahey.

For the City Council to acquiesce to a proposal such as this just because a couple of leading citizens ask is simply the wrong. When the city names a street or any other property there should be an objective process that vets not only the individual’s worthiness but the appropriateness, business sense and fairness of so doing. Questions should be asked to avoid unintended consequences. Is it appropriate to name/rename a facility for a living former office holder? If it is going to be done for one person, what are the criteria that merit that honor and decision over others who have served in the same capacity? If it is acceptable to name a facility after a former elected official, should there be a pre-determined length of time after the completion of his/her service? Is it appropriate that such an action be taken at the behest of a couple of citizens or should there be a committee process where input comes from many in the community and where the rationale for such is discussed and debated?: Does the process ensure that it is free from partisan politics and other potential influences?

While many might make a case as to whether this initiative is about former Mayor Fahey and whether he deserves this recognition or not, the reality is that this is a much bigger issue with many ramifications and potential consequences that should require a process that ensures fairness and appropriateness. It’s about more than whether someone likes a former mayor whether it is Mike Fahey or Hal Daub or someone else.

The Omaha City Council should do its homework and establish a fair and objective process before rushing into virtually spontaneous feel-good decisions that create long-term consequences.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Johanns Gets it Right on Hate Crimes

We didn't get a chance to say it but we applaud Senator Johanns for voting against the Defense Appropriations bill last week. His stated reasons for doing so were because of the hate crimes legislation which was attached to the bill and because of the weakening of restrictions on bringing Guantanamo Bay detainees to the United States.

In particular we agree with Johanns assessment that, "It includes hate crimes legislation, which says certain crimes are more worthy of protection than others. Many are rightly angered by this provision because the Constitution guarantees everyone equal protection under the law."

We've opined enough on hate crimes and we're glad that at least one of our U.S. Senators from Nebraska recognizes the danger of this legislation. Too bad Ben Nelson didn't.

The Cost of Busing

Last week the Douglas Street Rag ran an article about busing students to achieve economic diversity in the recently created monster known as the Learning Community. It noted that first year costs will probably be a $1.5 million, or approximately $2,000 per student. That's what the headline said. But for those who read a little further, the real news is that to achieve 'economic diversity' at the levels prescribed, some 26,000 students will need to be bused. 26,000! And the cost, at $2,000 each will be a mere $52,000,000. That will pay for the transportation and not a cent toward teachers or text books, but you can bet it will create lots of bureaucratic jobs.

The Learning Community is going to be a VERY EXPENSIVE superfluous addition to an already bloated education system that seems more worried about taking care of teachers (even if they turn down 4% raises in a recession), administrators and the feel-good mentality of those who don't understand that money doesn't solve socio-economic problems. Just look at the results of Lyndon Baines Johnson's War on Poverty.

We hope the suit that has at last been filed questioning the legality of this creation succeeds. A much better idea would be eliminating the hundreds of Nebraska school districts and establishing no more than 92 county school districts. But then the legislature and its politicians don't have the stomach to do that.

Scratch Another GOP Candidate off the List for 2012 - Doug Patton

October 25, 2009

Newt Gingrich has often shown himself to be one of the great political and social visionaries of our time. A historian with a PhD and the ability to author a couple of books a year (he’s written nineteen so far), the former Speaker of the House was first elected to Congress in 1978, in the middle of the hapless Jimmy Carter administration and from Carter’s home state of Georgia. It was an indication of things to come.

During the 1980s and early 1990s, Gingrich developed a will and an ability to lead. When Bill and Hillary Clinton tried to destroy health care as we know it in 1993-94, Newt Gingrich saw a once-in-a-century opportunity to realign power at the federal level. He called it the “Contract with America.”

Newt’s goal was to take Tip O’Neill’s old adage that “all politics is local” and turn it on its head by nationalizing a contest for control of the United States House of Representatives. He travelled the country working tirelessly on behalf of GOP candidates. That was how I first met him, when he came to the Midwest to campaign for a young conservative congressional candidate for whom I was working at the time.

In September of 1994, then-House Minority Whip Newt Gingrich summoned to Washington all those grateful candidates, for whom he had worked so hard over the previous months, to sign the Contract with America on the steps of the Capitol. It was an historic moment, and Newt knew it. The result was one of the most stunning shifts in political power in one election in the history of the Republic. Newt became Speaker and shepherded nine out of ten of the Contract’s provisions through the House.

I write all this to preface my contention that Newt Gingrich, who should be a contender for president in 2012, has now disqualified himself. The former Speaker probably might have overcome the baggage of two failed marriages and an intense hatred by most in the mainstream media. Conservatives liked him and are still grateful for what he did for the movement. But Newt has fallen for the biggest lie in politics, and it is this: we must support Republicans simply because they are Republicans.

I refer, of course, to Newt’s recent endorsement of New York State Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava in the special election in the Empire State’s 23rd Congressional District. Officially, Scozzafava is a Republican, although her political philosophy mirrors few of the GOP’s platform tenets. She is locked in a three-way race for Congress with the Democrat, attorney Bill Owens, and the only conservative in the race, Doug Hoffman. The three are vying for the seat being vacated by Republican John McHugh, who has been appointed Secretary of the Army.

As columnist Michelle Malkin has pointed out, Scozzafava is “an ACORN-friendly, big labor-backing, tax-and-spend radical in GOP clothing.” She favors same-sex marriage, unfettered abortion on demand, and has such an atrocious voting record on taxes in the state legislature that Owens, the Democrat, is attacking her as a “tax raiser”!

Naturally most true conservatives are lining up to support Hoffman, the nominee of New York’s Conservative Party. Former Alaska Gov. Sara Palin, arguably our most reliable political compass at the moment, has enthusiastically endorsed him. The Club for Growth has blasted Gingrich for his endorsement of Scozzafava.

This congressional seat has long been held by a Republican, but if conservatives split their votes between Scozzafava and Hoffman, that could change. That is where Gingrich could make a difference if he were to endorse Hoffman. Instead, his endorsement of Scozzafava puts him, politically speaking, in bed with Markos Moulitsas, purveyor of the vile, left-wing blog known as The Daily Kos.

Newt’s logic? He says he wants to win a Republican majority again. With all due respect, Mr. Speaker, for what? Has wandering in the political wilderness since the repudiation of the voters after the big-spending, liberal-light actions of the last Republican Congress taught you nothing? With “Republicans” like Dede Scozzafava, who needs Democrats? Obviously not Markos Moulitsas and his crazed Socialist ilk!

Newt Gingrich should not run for president. Even if he were to win, there is no way we could trust him now.

© Copyright 2009 by Doug Patton

Doug Patton is a freelance columnist who has served as a political speechwriter and policy advisor to conservative candidates, elected officials and public policy organizations. His weekly columns are published in newspapers across the country and on selected Internet web sites, including Human Events Online and, where he is a senior writer and state editor. Readers may e-mail him at

Saturday, October 24, 2009

The Good News and The Bad News For Republicans

There's a little good and a little bad news for Republicans according to Rasmussen Reports. First of all, for the first time in years voters trust Republicans more than Democrats on the top ten issues that Rasmussen Reports regularly tracks. Good News. You can read about this at:

Now the bad news: Just 15% of Republicans who plan to vote in 2012 state primaries say the party’s representatives in Congress have done a good job of representing GOP values. Seventy-three percent (73%) say Republicans in Congress have lost touch with their voters throughout the nation. Guess we could have told you this ourselves. You can check this one out at:

Friday, October 23, 2009

No Street Name for Daub

We received the following note from former Mayor Hal Daub today. We will have further comments about 'naming' resolutions in the next few days, but we encourage you to read Hal's words below.

"With all the talk about street naming, it seems some people are talking about naming a street after me as well. Respectfully—but with regard to P.J. Morgan, Mike Boyle, and some good mayors who served Omaha faithfully and are now deceased—I don’t think it’s appropriate. This special honor has traditionally been bestowed at the end a lifetime of service—and by God’s grace I hope to have many more years ahead of me to continue to serve our community in the ways which bring Mary and me so much joy. So for me, the consideration is appreciated, but not at this time or under these circumstances."

The Nebraska Treasurer's Race

Seems just about everyone wants to be Nebraska's next State Treasurer since Shane Osborn isn't running. We have Don Stenberg, former Attorney General, and about five current state senators who are desirous of trading in their $12,000 a year jobs for the $85,000 position. Most active of the latter is Tony Fulton who is just about ubiquitous. Now we hear that former Colonel and Superintendent of the Nebraska State Patrol is in the race.

Nesbitt is little more than former Governor and current Senator Johanns fair-haired buddy whom Johanns appointed from the ranks of the patrol. Since Governor Heineman promptly disposed of the guy he has been invisible, at least in Republican ranks from which he will have to draw his support. This guy might consider moving to some small county and running for sheriff if he wants to start a political career. He has no chance of winning this position. He has less Republican credentials than most of those non-partisan state legislators he will be running against.

Having noted the above, the outcome of this race is pretty clear. Don Stenberg, whom voters have voted for many many times in former races for Attorney General and the U.S. Senate, wins the nomination in a crowded field of folks that virtually have only 'district' appeal and name recognition. And every new Republican candidate in the race only increases Don's margin of victory.

Don will stay away from a formal announcement for a while waiting for the 'also runs' to get in. This will assure his victory while the others work through their spring 60 day session in the legislature through April 30th (excepting Nesbitt), allowing Don to campaign at his convenience and get through the primary with little need for huge fund raising.

In the meantime, Democrat Chairman Covalt will try to find someone that is capable of even getting a small percent of the general election vote against Don. That is if he can find anyone of substance to run against the governor before next July's Democrat State Party Convention. We still think Scott Kleeb is the answer to all of Covalt's problems......

We Can Run Your Health Care But We Can't Handle a Home Buyer's Program

It's amazing that the government of Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama thinks it can control 17% of the private sector economy by adding it's expertise to control costs and fraud. Yet, it seems that it can't even begin to manage 'cash for clunkers' and now we find out that the $8,000 first time home buyers program is completely out of control.

In an article today in the Washington Post, 'Costly fraud and error reported in home buyers' tax program,' we're told, among other things that:

"The report found that more than 19,300 people claimed a total of $139 million on their 2008 tax returns before purchasing a home even though the law requires the purchase to take place first, J. Russell George, the inspector general, told a House Ways and Means subcommittee.

Nearly 74,000 buyers -- including some IRS employees -- claimed a total of $500 million in tax credits despite indications that they may have owned a home before, George said. The law bans people from getting this credit if they have owned a home in the previous three years.
Even children claimed the tax credit, said George, adding that 580 taxpayers under age 18 -- including some 4-year-olds -- claimed $4 million, presumably so their parents could dodge the income limitations imposed by the program"

Evidence such as this should certainly make the American public confident that the government take over of health care will be good for them?

You can check out the article at:

Thousands Are Dying - Where Is Obama?

With the paucity of H1N1 vaccine availability and folks dying daily from the disease, a declared epidemic, the Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Obama seems oblivious to the gravity of the situation as he jets around the country raising millions of dollars from wealthy donors who shell out $30,000 or more to touch His Holiness.

We wonder what Democrats would be saying about George W. Bush in a similar situation?

We wonder what the 'government controlled media' would be saying?

Well, where is the criticism? Oh, we wouldn't dare criticize the Commissar, would we?

Czars and the Commissar's Administration

There was some discussion yesterday in a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, about the number of Czars in the administration of Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama's administration and the appropriateness of the title as well as the number of them.

In a Washington Post column today, Dana Milbank noted that, "The king (Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama) did not send any of his courtiers to the hearing. But one courtier, White House counsel Greg Craig, did send a note to the lawmakers. "Some have embraced a list of 32 supposed 'czars' despite the fact that nine of those positions are subject to Senate confirmation, 15 existed in previous administrations, and 16 have testified before Congress this year," he wrote. "Under this definition the Bush administration reportedly had 36 czar positions."

Actually, we thought that the administration of Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama was about 'change'. It seems to us that attempting to use the evil Bush administration as a 'standard' for this administration isn't about change at all.

You can check out Milbank's column at:

More on The Obama Enemies List

We've already opined recently at least twice (More Enemies Lists , The Commissar's 'Enemies List' ) on what seems to be a building Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama/White House 'enemies list', but we have even more evidence of that with their attempt to exclude Fox News from having 'pay czar' Ken Feinberg available when all other networks were to be given access to him.

Whether it's Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and talk radio, or the U.S. Chamber of Commerce there does, in fact, appear to do exactly what Richard Nixon did, create an enemies list AND PUNISH those on it.

In a column today, Charles Krauthammer opines: "While government can and should debate and criticize opposition voices, the current White House goes beyond that. It wants to delegitimize any significant dissent. The objective is no secret. White House aides openly told Politico that they're engaged in a deliberate campaign to marginalize and ostracize recalcitrants, from Fox to health insurers to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce."

For more on what is going on here you could also read a New York Times article, 'Behind the War Between the White House and Fox' at:

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Fahey Street A Bad Idea - Patrick McPherson

Believe it or not there is an effort afoot to name a portion of Webster Street between the Qwest Center and Creighton University after former Mayor Fahey. The effort is being promoted by Father Schlegel of Creighton University and Jim Young of the Union Pacific and likely will be introduced as a resolution before the Omaha City Council next week with a public hearing the following week.

  • Because Mike Fahey has been out of office barely 100 days.

  • Naming any kind of public street or building after a living individual is fraught with all kinds of potential unintended consequences

  • Mike Fahey continues to be involved in city politics just as Hal Daub, P. J. Morgan and other former mayors

  • Mike Fahey is a Democrat operative

  • Mike Fahey is still a potential candidate for state or local office in the future

  • What makes Mike Fahey's contributions more deserving of such recognition than that of other former mayors?

Having noted the above, this is a bad idea, but even worse it is clearly one that makes no sense. Why would you name a street after Fahey? If you do so, why wouldn't you name the Qwest Center after Hal Daub? Why not the West Dodge Expressway which Daub supported and Fahey opposed?

I'd be delighted to see Hal Daub recognized for the significant improvements he brought to the City of Omaha. I also recognize that Mike Fahey had his accomplishments. But starting the process of naming anything after recent mayors is just bad policy that simply can't be justified unless you recognize the accomplishments of all former mayors who have had a significant impact on our city.

Throw Out the Constitution

Yes, maybe the U.S. Constitution just isn't useful anymore. Maybe we don't need it at all if we are to allow the government to control our lives and pass legislation unimpeded by unimportant clauses of the Constitution.

Well, we at the Objective Conservative happen to believe the U.S. Constitution is the most important document conceived by any government in history. We believe it truly defines what federal government can do and is legally empowered to do. We believe it truly reflects the notion that we the people do have rights and that we confer certain responsibilities and authorities to a limited federal government, not the contrary where a federal government confers certain rights on citizens.

Regardless of what powers and authority we have allowed the federal government to usurp and assert over us in the past, we believe that what we face today with the government take over of health care and 17% of our economy is a CRISIS. It is a crisis that in the end will determine the viability of the U.S. Constitution and the very determination of who, the government or the people, really has the power to decide whether government flows from rights given it by the people or whether the rights of the people are simply deferred on them by government. If the latter is the case, maybe we should just throw out the U.S. Constitution and let The Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama, Comrades Pelosi, Reid and associates write a new one that defines what rights the government truly wants us to have (which would be few in none).

Okay, we opined enough and now we suggest that you take a look at a column that caught our eye today, 'Can Obama and Congress Order You to Buy Broccoli?' by Terry Jeffrey. You can find it at:
We'd also suggest that you take a look at a column today by Walter E. Williams, 'American Idea' wherein among other things he says:
"The debate centers around questions as whether such involvement is a good idea or a bad idea and whether one program is more costly than another. Those questions are entirely irrelevant to what should be debated, namely: Is such government involvement in our lives permissible under the U.S. Constitution?
"That question is not part of the debate. The American people, along with our elected representatives, whether they’re Republicans or Democrats, care less about what is and what is not permissible under our Constitution. They think Congress has the right to do anything upon which they can secure a majority vote, whether they have the constitutional or moral authority to do so or not."

More Enemies Lists

Yesterday we opined in The Commissar's Enemies List (see blog entry below) that the Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Barack Hussein Obama was constructing an enemies list, i.e., Fox News and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. As we've caught up on some columns from yesterday we were amused by the title and content of another that seemed to have similar thoughts: David Limbaugh's 'Barack's EnemiesList. You might want to check out his more example filled version at:

Rich Galen in his column on Monday, 'Enemies List', also brought up this notion. You can check that out at:

Somehow, all of a sudden, this administration seems to be becoming more perceived as one that Richard Nixon might have admired. Nonetheless, we'd compare its competence to that of failed but fellow Nobel Peace Price Laureate Jimmy Carter.

The Way it Is or Was

A good column Monday by Cal Thomas, 'The Way it Is'. Among other things, Thomas notes:

"Washington's attitude toward those who make right decisions for themselves so as not to become a burden to government seems to be, "Good for you, but because you made all those right decisions ('right' being a relative term, so the government will say they were right FOR YOU), we will penalize your decisions and your success and take the money you earned and give it to others who didn't earn it because we want their votes so we can preserve our political careers."

You can read it at:

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Could Senator Hagel Be a Responsible Secretary of Defense - Gerald Florine

As President Obama continues to vacillate, equivocate, procrastinate, perhaps even prevaricate, on what to do about troop levels and strategy in Afghanistan, seemingly being held hostage by the lunatic left of the Democrat Party, and his own inability to make a decision that should be in the long term interests of the United States and the Western world as opposed to political expediency, and now using the Afghan elections as a pretense to even further prolong the decision, and perhaps use it as a pretense for a significant modification to the strategy proposed by General McChrystal, it is perhaps a propitious time to take another look at the “world” views of this administration, and their similarities to those set forth by none other than former Nebraska U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel, alleged in some quarters to be a possible candidate as the next Secretary of Defense.

Senator Hagel’s views, as expressed in his early September article in the Washington Post, are most telling! In fact, one might query whether this might have been a piece of his preparatory process for that position!

Some quotes: “The 9/11 commission pointed out the attacks were as much about failures of our intelligence and security systems as about the terrorists’ success. The U.S. response, engaging in two wars, was a 20th-century reaction to 21st-century realities. “ (The Senator apparently confuses the difference between the failure to stop the attacks, i.e. intelligence, and the substantive rationale for them, and the reality of the overall threat.)

“No country today has the power to impose its will and values on other nations. As the new world order takes shape, America must lead by building coalitions of common interests. . .” (Really? So now the United States must be pure as the wind drive snow, acting only with the approval of those with “common interests”, while Russia, Iran, Venezuela, etc., continue their nefarious policies to impose their wills on smaller, weaker nations????)

“. . . after World War II. . .international organizations such as the United Nations, NATO. . . established boundaries for human and government conduct and expectations that helped keep the world from drifting into World War III.” (Ah, so it was the United Nations that is responsible for ending the Cold War, averting WWIII, and would have brought about a utopian existence, had it not been for the aggressive, colonialist tendencies of the U.S.???)

“We need a clearly defined strategy that accounts for the interconnectedness and the shared interests of all nations. Every great threat to the United States . . . Also threatens our global partners and rivals. . . . We cannot view U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan through a lens that sees only “winning” or “losing”.” (As the great philosopher Rodney King once said, “Can’t we all just get along???”)

“Bogging down large armies in historically complex, dangerous areas ends in disaster. . . . Today’s wars are quite different from Vietnam. . . . We must put forward fresh thinking. We can no longer hold ourselves to narrow “single” issue engagement with dealing with nations such as Russia, China, Indian, Brazil, or South Korea.. . . Does anyone believe we will get to a responsible resolution on Iran without Russia? “

(The answer to that, Senator Hagel, after last week, is that Russia will continue to stand in the way of doing anything to pressure Iran from achieving its militaristic nuclear ambitions, regardless of how much this Administration attempts to bribe them and sell out our Eastern European allies!).

“Global collaboration does not mean retreating from our standards, values, or sovereignty. . . . Relying on the use of force as a centerpiece of our global strategy, as we have in recent years, is economically, strategically, and politically unsustainable and will result in tragedy. . . We must shift our thinking, now, to pursue wiser courses of action. . .” (What courses of action will prevail, or succeed, without the supporting option of strength, and potential force, Senator?)

“The president and his national security team should listen to recording and conversations that President Lyndon B. Johnson had with Sen. Richard Russell about Vietnam, especially those in which LBJ told Russell that we could not win in Vietnam but that he did not want to pull out and be the first American president to lose a war.”

Is it not chilling that many of these views appear to be shared with the current Administration, and with Senator Hagel’s good friend, Vice President Biden and long time associate on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee? Senator Hagel’s comments about “the new world order”, giving credit to the United Nations and other international organizations for preventing WWIII, the indicated need to subjugate the interests of the United States to the common good of the international community, the incredible comment that “Every great threat to the United States. . . Also threatens our . . .rivals”, the expressed need to kowtow to Russia to get some sort of resolution on Iran (that is REALLY looking good right now with Vladimir kicking sand in Barack’s face once again this past week!), and the comments that “today’s wars are different from Vietnam”, (yes, that’s correct) but then asking the Administration to review Lyndon Johnson’s conversations (could there be a more incompetent example for addressing a war situation than LBJ’s conversations, unless one was providing an example of how absolutely NOT to pursue a military objective??).

Senator Hagel may have been reasonably fiscally conservative, and maintained reasonably conservative values and views on social issues, but it appears that he has aligned himself with the more extreme elements of the liberal and internationalist community on his foreign policy and world views. Secretary Gates has dramatically and heroically now put his job and reputation on the line by countering White House consigliere Rahm Emmanuel by virtually demanding a decision from the President on Afghanistan and rebuking the thought of postponing a decision until the government of Afghanistan is stabilized! Given his stated views, and given his apparent alignment with the Democrat left on foreign policy, could Senator Hagel really be a responsible Secretary of Defense? Perhaps only from a utopian, leftist viewpoint, could one answer in the affirmative!

The Commissar's 'Enemies List'

The White House of Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama seems to be picking lots of arguments lately. One of course is with Fox News. There is an old axiom, 'don't pick a fight with folks who buy ink by the barrel.' While Fox doesn't buy ink, it sure has a following and ignoring it or fighting it will gain the White House nothing.

Now it seems that the White House of Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama is not happy with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, an organization that represents hundreds of thousands of small businesses. In particular, the White House of Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama has taken issue with the Chamber's recent stands on cap-and-trade and now health care. The Chamber was a strong supporter of several of the early efforts of the administration but now when it and its members oppose the over-zealous national takeover of more than 17% of the economy they are a bad guy. We'd suggest it is not a good idea to pick a fight with those small businesses that create some 70% of every new job created in America. If the president hasn't noticed Government Motors and Chrysler are no longer exactly creating jobs and one might assert that part of the reason was high benefit costs (health care) and lower cost providers/competition (foreign auto makers).

From our standpoint, we hope that Fox and the Chamber keep up their efforts despite their being on the 'Enemies List' List of the White House of Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Barack Hussein Obama.

Are Lee Terry's Chances For Re-election Improving?

Stuart Rothenberg generally has a good handle on electoral prospects and at this point he is thinking 2010 will be a difficult time for Democrats. In his column, 'Landscape Shift Means Trouble for House Democrats' Rothenberg suggests, "But even if the news is more upbeat for Democrats a year from now, the new political landscape is bad news for the dozen or so House Democrats at greatest risk."

On the other hand he has something that Congressman Lee Terry might regard as positive: "Of course, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has made a significant recruiting effort to put additional Republican-held seats into play by recruiting challengers to Reps. Charlie Dent (Pa.), Patrick Tiberi (Ohio), Mary Bono Mack (Calif.), Lee Terry (Neb.) and, yet again, Michele Bachmann (Minn.). But the overall direction of the cycle makes it much more difficult for those Democratic challengers than it would have been in 2006 or 2008."

Health Care is About Control, Not Health Care - Doug Patton

October 19, 2009

The entire Declaration of Independence, including all 56 signatures, is contained on a single hand-written sheet of paper.

The full and complete original Constitution of the United States of America is printed on six pages. The first four pages contain the basic text of the founding document. Page five is the letter of transmittal to the British government. And the sixth and final page contains all ten of the initial amendments, known as the Bill of Rights.

Karl Marx laid out The Communist Manifesto in a mere 23 pages.

The English translation of Dostoevski’s Crime and Punishment is 718 pages, while Tolstoy’s War and Peace weighs in at 1,225 pages. And try as she might, even Ayn Rand could manage only 1,069 pages in her magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged.

My personal, large-print New King James copy of the Bible contains 1,426 pages of text, a 64-page concordance and six pages of maps.

What do these momentous documents have in common with each other? They all contain fewer pages than the bloated senate health care bill, S. 1796, which totals a ridiculous 1,502 pages.

In other words, the Founding Fathers of the United States of America, the father of modern Communism, three of history’s most prolific Russian writers and even God Almighty Himself didn’t need as many words to get their entire message across as the self-important blowhards in Congress trying to express themselves on one single issue: health care.

But let’s be honest. What’s going on in Washington right now is not really about health care; it is about control. The senate leaders, in conjunction with the White House, are doing the same thing they did with the stimulus bill, the omnibus bill, the budget bill and the cap and trade bill. Thousands of pages of rules, regulations, restrictions and, most of all, astronomical spending. They believe that if they so overwhelm the American people with mind-numbing legalese, we will simply take their word for it that this poison pill isn’t going to hurt us.

On top of the already burdensome language of this monstrosity, they have made it a moving target. It started with House Resolution 3200. Now it has morphed into the senate version. But they are not even close to being finished with it. In fact, the current, so-called Baucus bill, with its “moderate” approach to health care reform, is merely the framework for the shell game Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is playing with our health care system. Even if S. 1796 were acceptable in a free society — which it isn’t — it in no way reflects how the final bill will read.

President Barack Obama and the domineering Democrat leadership in Congress never talk about freedom. They whine about “fairness” and “security,” but the word “liberty” is not in their vocabulary. The Founders would have considered the current “reform” going on in Congress as nothing short of criminal. They would rebel against this tyranny as surely as they revolted against the despotism of King George.

One thing on which we can depend: this process will not improve the bill. If this piece of statism passes, the federal government will eventually tell us what we can or cannot eat or drink, how much exercise we must do to stay fit, what we can and cannot smoke (pot yes, tobacco no), whether or not we can have guns in our homes (they’re dangerous, you know, and therefore affect our health care costs) and how many children we can have.

And they will do it all in the name of “health care reform.”


© Copyright 2009 by Doug Patton

Doug Patton is a freelance columnist who has served as a political speechwriter and policy advisor to conservative candidates, elected officials and public policy organizations. His weekly columns are published in newspapers across the country and on selected Internet web sites, including Human Events Online and, where he is a senior writer and state editor. Readers may e-mail him at

Monday, October 19, 2009

Who Are They Listening To?

Rasmussen Reports tells us today that:

"Now that the Senate Finance Committee has passed its version of health care reform, 42% of voters nationwide favor the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s down two points from a week ago and down four from the week before.
"The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 54% are opposed to the plan (our emphasis)."

What is it that Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama, Dirty Harry and Queen Pelosi and associates don't understand? The numbers won't get any better after Dirty Harry comes up with one Senate bill and then after he and the Queen launder their two versions through the conference process. The numbers will only move down, but apparently they won't hear. Hopefully, their plans will cover hearing aides along with such important government funded health care needs such as abortion, trans-gender operations......

Let's Get Sick, or Claim We Are, and GET HIGH

Seems the Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama has instructed his Department of Justice to not enforce federal marijuana laws as long as states recognize the substance for medical purposes.

Gosh if a woman can get an abortion for 'mental health and wellness issues' maybe the rest of us can get medial marijuana for what ever ails our psyches.....

See the article if you're not already too high to read at:

Scrutinizing Political Groups and the Local Paper

In case you missed it yesterday, there was a front page above-the-fold article in the Midlands section of the Douglas Street Rag, 'Election-turnout ideas get yay, nay votes.'

Essentially it discussed the ideas of several 'non-partisan' (liberal Democrat) Nebraska legislators on the idea of election-day registration. The article also referred to a group identified as Nebraskans for Civic Reform and its director Adam Morfeld, promoters of this idea (as well as other liberal/Democrat election initiatives).

Not unusual for the sterling reporters of the Douglas Street Rag, there is no identification of the motivation of those behind the group, thus lending credibility to it because of its name. A google search of the group reveals that it is basically a Nebraska School of Law group of Democrats.

Morfeld has been involved with an on-campus group of Democrat law students and has been an intern for Ben Nelson.

The organization's so-called Legislative Director, David Solheim is a law student at the Nebraska College of Law who opines that, "The small things are important. Process matters. We learned in 2000 that just a handful of heavily contested votes in a few precincts in Florida had the ability to determine the course of our nation for the next eight years."

Katie Kidwell the so-called Field Director for Nebraskans for Civic Reform is a student of history and English at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, who opines that, “2008 was an exhilarating year for politics. With high voter turnout and a split electoral vote, Nebraska experienced this energy. As part of Nebraskans for Civic Reform, I hope to continue the enthusiasm sparked during election season by working to maintain Nebraska’s split electoral vote and legislate Election Day Registration, among other initiatives."

Linsey Marshall the so-called Communications Director for Nebraskans for Civic Reform is a law student at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln also. She opines that, "There has never been a better time to become involved with politics in Nebraska. With the recent election splitting Nebraska’s electoral votes for the first time in history and generating an impressive voter turnout, people across the nation are watching our legislature to see how it will react. Nebraskans for Civic Reform is dedicated to preserving Nebraska's unique role in the Electoral College, and I am proud to be a part of this forward-thinking organization."

What's the point here? Simply, anyone can form a group (not even recognized by or filed with the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission) to enhance their resumes and promote their liberal beliefs without any scrutiny by the local newspapers. And yet, based on their less than significant resumes they appear to have credibility based on their organization's name.

Maybe some college Republicans can for a group, Nebraskans for Civic Responsibility or something similar, which would support responsibility in registering to vote in a timely fashion and which would support the return of the 'winner-takes-all' method of allocating electoral votes used by 48 other states. In so doing they could enhance their resumes with fancy titles and perhaps even go unscrutinized by the Douglas Street Rag.......

Saturday, October 17, 2009

Where There Is Smoke, There is Probably Fire - Earmarks

To get away from the Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama for a while we thought we'd call your attention to an article in today's Washington Post on earmarks, one of our favorite topics. The article, 'Earmark Probe Focusing on Former Aide to Visclosky' deals with Democrat Indiana Congressman Peter J. Vsclosky, his former aide, Charles Brimmer and PMA, the lobbying firm, and friend of none other than the Democrat Culture of Corruption Posterboy himself, John Murtha. Seems the government is spending lots of time looking at Brimmer and 'quid pro quo' earmarks. You can check it out at:

It's time this ugly earmark practice be brought to an end.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Jimmy Carter's Successor

It's so hard to resist comparing the aspirational Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama to a fellow Democrat president named Jimmy Carter. In the case of Jimmy Carter, he virtually destroyed any respect that the world had for America through his pacifist, feel good international polices and his inexcusable tolerance of Iran's hostage taking of American citizens. It took a president not concerned about his 'world image', Ronald Reagan to restore not only international respect but also national pride.

Today, the Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar Barack Hussein Obama seems to be following the former Carter example, even suggesting that no one nation ought to hold itself out as better or stronger than any other. We won't even go into his financial mismanagement which will have consequences for generations to come should someone following him be able to save our country from the financial conquering of China.

But enough happy talk. We thought we'd suggest you catch Charles Krauthamer's column, 'Debacle in Moscow' which pretty will summarizes the international accomplishments of the Prince of Peace Nobel Laureate Commissar since his coronation as President of the World of Peace and Respect at: