Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

OUR DAILY SNIPPETS ARE HERE.

WEDNESDAY,  MARCH 17,  2010

STATES START THE REBELLION – AT 8:26 P.M. ET:  Those lazy, uninformed, we-don't-care-'bout-nothin'-but-fuh-ball Americans just won't learn their place.  What's gotten into these creatures?  Now the states (do the finer European countries have states?) want to inject themselves into health care, surely a province of the better educated.  From AP:

BOISE, Idaho — Idaho took the lead in a growing, nationwide fight against health care overhaul Wednesday when its governor became the first to sign a measure requiring the state attorney general to sue the federal government if residents are forced to buy health insurance.

Similar legislation is pending in 37 other states.

Constitutional law experts say the movement is mostly symbolic because federal laws supersede those of the states.

But the state measures reflect a growing frustration with President President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. The proposal would cover some 30 million uninsured people, end insurance practices such as denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, require almost all Americans to get coverage by law, and try to slow the cost of medical care nationwide.
Democratic leaders hope to vote on it this weekend.

With Washington closing in on a deal in the months-long battle over health care overhaul, Republican state lawmakers opposed to the measure are stepping up opposition.

Otter, a Republican, said he believes any future lawsuit from Idaho has a legitimate shot of winning, despite what the naysayers say.

"The ivory tower folks will tell you, 'No, they're not going anywhere,' " he told reporters. "But I'll tell you what, you get 36 states, that's a critical mass. That's a constitutional mass." 

COMMENT:  Federal law does supersede state law.  However, a revolt of the states can have two effects:  First, it can have a powerful political influence in Washington.  Members of Congress are influenced by what their states do and feel.  Governors may not have the bully pulpit of the president, but they do have pulpits.  They also have the ability to propose state health plans that can be adopted nationally if enough people get behind them.

Second, and it's a real nuclear option, a revolt of the states can lead to a Constitutional amendment.  Remember, we repealed prohibition through an amendment.  If Americans really come to despise a national health plan, it can be Constitutionally amended out of business.  While I would be reluctant to see the amending process used for that purpose, the Obamans are pushing hard, against public opposition, and it might just come to that. 

March 17, 2010   Permalink

REPEAL!  REPEAL! – AT 7:28 P.M. ET:  Like good Boy Scouts, Republicans want to be prepared.  Anticipating the nightmarish possibility that the health-care monstrosity might actually pass, the GOP is organizing its next step, as the Washington Post reports.  Unlike Hollywood actors, Republicans aren't threatening to leave the country:

Can Republicans win election this fall by campaigning to repeal the health-care legislation now nearing passage in Congress?

Even as House Democrats search for the votes to send the bill to President Obama, dozens of Republican lawmakers and candidates have signed a pledge to back an effort to repeal the bill, should the GOP take control of either house of Congress after this fall's elections.

Started by the conservative activist group Club for Growth, the "Repeal It" movement first won the backing in January of some of the most conservative Republicans in Congress, such as "tea party" favorite Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.). It has since expanded to include some of the party's Senate candidates in liberal-leaning states such as New Hampshire and Illinois.

Congressional Republicans are currently battling the Democrats over the House procedures they could use to pass the health-care bill. But they are promising this fall to continue the spirited debate over the substance of the bill that has dominated the last year on Capitol Hill. And the repeal will likely be a key issue, even as lawmakers on both sides acknowledge any repeal would be highly unlikely as long as President Obama remains in office, as he could veto any such legislation.

True.  But let him veto it.  It will further the argument that he must be replaced in 2012. 

March 17, 2010   Permalink

THE NON-WANTING OF OBAMA – AT 6:38 P.M. ET:  For the first time, the Gallup poll shows more voters disapproving of Obama's performance than approving.

Some 47% disapprove, and 46% approve in the poll released today.

Compare please with the latest Rasmussen survey, released this morning:

Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty-five percent (55%) disapprove.

The big difference is in the "disapprove" category.  But the approval numbers, 44% in Rasmussen, 46% in Gallup, are remarkably close.  It appears that Obama's approval numbers are now hovering in the mid-forties.  This is not a great tribute.  Mr. Obama is dragging down his party, not enhancing it.

March 17, 2010   Permalink

AIR FORCE ONE, AND ITS INFLUENCE ON WHETHER YOU GET THAT LIFE-SAVING OPERATION – AT 11:30 A.M. ET:  Congressman Dennis Kucinich, the far-left loon from Cleveland, has shifted his vote from "no" to "yes" on health-care reform, after getting a ride on Air Force One.

Kucinich had opposed the Dem leaders' health bill all along because he felt it wasn't leftist enough.  But now, after the magic-carpet ride, he's suddenly had a change of heart.  The brain was not involved.  From Fox:

Developing: Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, announced Wednesday that he would vote for the Senate health care bill, becoming the most prominent House Democrat to reverse his opposition.

With Kucinich's switch, Democrats now have 212 votes in favor of the bill, four shy of the 216-threshold needed for passage.

That 212 number may be a bit high, if other news sources are to be believed.

"This is not the bill I wanted to support even as I continued efforts into the last minute to try and modify the bill," he said at a news conference. "However, after careful discussions with President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, my wife Elizabeth and close friends, I've decided to cast a vote in favor of the legislation."

Kucinich voted against the House bill in November and has opposed the Senate bill because it doesn't include a government-run insurance plan.

But Kucinich has been under enormous pressure in recent weeks to lend his support to the bill, especially from Obama, who visited Kucinich's district on Monday.

Kucinich flew with Obama on Air Force One to a rally where members of the audience chanted at Kucinich to support the bill.

COMMENT:  I wonder what they fed him on the plane.  I wonder what movie they showed.  Probably "Reds."

March 17, 2010   Permalink

THE FUTURE OF FOX NEWS – AT 10:15 P.M. ET:  Those on our side have come to depend on Fox News as one of the few outlets where our views get a fair hearing.  But will that always be the case?

There have been some disturbing signs in recent days.  Fox, of course, is under the control of Rupert Murdoch, pro-American stalwart and something of a media genius.  But Murdoch is aging, and it's widely reported that his son, James, who's becoming increasingly powerful in the parent News Corporation, which owns Fox, has views rather different from those of his father.  In particular, James has an affinity for the Arab world, despite the fact that freedom of the press doesn't exactly thrive in that culture. 

Fox News has received an infusion of Saudi money, primarily from a Saudi prince who spreads money around the United States to buy influence.  Fox announced a few weeks ago that its Mideast headquarters would be in Abu Dhabi.

The obvious question is whether these changes will affect Fox's reporting.  Several commentators have already noticed, as have I, a subtle change to a more pro-Arab line in some Fox news reports.  A report by Amy Kellogg about the Golan Heights last night was particularly disturbing, coming from a reporter who's been reliable in the past.  Left out completely, and shockingly, was the fact that the Golan had been used as an artillery platform by Syria to pound villages in Israel proper before Israel seized the Heights in the 1967 Six-Day War.  Some of the reporting from Jerusalem has also been leaving out the context that Fox has normally supplied in the past. 

How far will this go?  Hard to say.  But I'm afraid the signs aren't good.  Rupert Murdoch will fade away.  Money talks.  It is frightening to think of the influences that may come into play in the Murdoch empire in the future, an empire that includes Twentieth Century Fox studios, the Times of London, and the The Wall Street Journal.  We may find Fox taking the side of the very people who would deny it the freedom to report freely.

So far I haven't seen any anti-American slant creeping into Fox's reporting, but one can legitimately have concerns.  James Murdoch is British, but educated in the United States at Harvard, from which he dropped out.  His wife works for a Bill Clinton-sponsored organization, the Clinton Climate Initiative. 

March 17, 2010   Permalink 

BARONE ON DEM TACTICS – AT 8:45 A.M. ET:  Michael Barone, a truly distinguished political analyst, dissects the health-care drama on Capitol Hill, one of the most exciting (and depressing) legislative battles of our lifetime:

Even when the party's president and policies are widely popular, some of its House members will be representing districts where that is not so, where they win because of personal popularity or historical tradition, constituency services or generous earmarking. Of the 253 current House Democrats, 45 represent districts that voted for John McCain. Even Democratic policies that are popular nationally aren't popular in most of these districts.

But the Democratic health care legislation is not popular nationally. Barack Obama won nationally 53 percent to 46 percent, but the RealClearPolitics.com average of recent polls shows disapproval of health care at 49 percent to 41 percent. Health care 2010 is polling 12 points behind Obama 2008.

And...

...there are only 115 Democratic members in seats where the putative support for the health care legislation is 50 percent or higher — 101 votes short of the 216 votes needed for a majority in a House with vacancies in four Democratic seats.

Barone points out that the Dem leaders in the House represent safe districts.  Not so their troops:

For many Democratic members — especially the 37 Democrats who voted no last November — the best thing to happen is for the bill not to come to a vote on the floor and just go away...

...My sense is that the current Democratic leadership is at least 10 votes short of the 216-vote majority. So far none of the 37 November no votes has publicly committed to voting yes, not even Dennis Kucinich, who objects to the legislation because it doesn't go far enough. And some of the yeses, like Bart Stupak, sponsor of the abortion funding ban in the House bill, are committed noes.

Finally...

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and White House press secretary Robert Gibbs confidently insisted last weekend that the bill would pass this week. Maybe not.

COMMENT:  The obscenity here is to try to seize one sixth of the nation's economy, and a sector where life and death is involved, with so little support from the public.  The arrogance of the Democratic leadership is breathtaking.  Normally, major, nation-changing legislation has at least some bipartisan support.  The civil rights laws of 1964, which changed the nation, had bipartisan backing.  So did Medicare.  What's happening now is almost unprecedented, and dangerous.

March 17, 2010   Permalink

TURN LEFT AND COUGH – AT 8:15 A.M. ET:  President Obama is scheduled to leave for Asia at noon on Sunday.  The House, at least according to the Pelosi Plan, will vote on health care no later than Saturday.  But are the votes there?

Actually, no one seems to know.  But momentum, as of this morning, appeared to be with the opponents:

Washington (CNN) -- Five more House Democrats said Tuesday that they will vote against Senate health care legislation, which puts opponents of reform just 11 votes shy of the 216 needed to prevent President Obama from scoring a major victory on his top domestic priority.

An ongoing CNN analysis shows that opposition in the House to the Senate health care plan has reached 205 members.

A total of 216 would be needed to block the bill.

Dem leaders are floating a controversial plan to have the House pass the legislation without actually voting on it.  Under this maneuver, members would vote on only certain provisions of the Senate bill, avoiding a vote on the entire, unpopular package.  The bill would then be "deemed" to have passed. 

As we reported yesterday, many Constitution experts consider the maneuver unconstitutional, but Dems may try it anyway so Obama can sign the bill before going on his Asian adventure.

We're following this hour by hour.  The whole process is a shambles.  Human lives depend on how we run health-care "reform."  Foreigners must be impressed by what they see.  That is a joke.

March 17, 2010   Permalink

OH YES, THERE'S THAT TERROR BUSINESS – AT 8:01 A.M. ET:  From the Washington Post:

Five Northern Virginia men arrested in Pakistan in December were charged Wednesday with six counts of violating state and anti-terror laws, several of which carry potential sentences of life in prison.

The men, ages 18 to 24, pleaded not guilty. A judge said the evidentiary phase of the trial will begin March 31.

The judge granted a request from prosecutors to charge the men with using Pakistani soil for terror attacks against a friendly country, attempting to use Pakistani soil for terror acts against a friendly country and directing a person or an organization to commit terrorist activities, all of which carry potential life sentences; and with criminal conspiracy to commit terror attacks in Pakistan, using and possessing money or property for committing terrorism and inciting other people to commit terror activities, all of which carry sentences of up to seven years.

Lawyers for the men said the trial should take about six months, and would be held in a special anti-terror court inside a sprawling prison in the dusty midland town of Sargodha, in central Punjab province.

Since there are no jury trials in Pakistan, the trial will be held before a judge. Prosecutors could request that it be held in secret.

And...

Pakistani police and intelligence officials who have interrogated the five men have said they were in contact for months with a Taliban recruiter and were trying to join up with al-Qaeda. They were hoping to battle U.S. troops in Afghanistan, the Pakistani officials said. The men's family members, friends and spiritual advisers in Northern Virginia have said they never saw any sign of radical activities or beliefs.

COMMENT:  Curious, but there's nothing in the piece about the attitude of the United States Government.  We'll play Devil's Advocate for a moment:  We despise terrorists and jihadism, but these are American citizens.  Will we try to have them shifted to the U.S. for trial, or will we accept Pakistani justice?  What will the attitude of the American left be? 

We'll study the case.  We'd also like a follow-up on why friends, relatives and "spiritual advisers" in the U.S. saw nothing unusual about these chaps.  You mean, they suddenly got up one day and went to Pakistan?  Did they really mean to go to Disneyland?  Travel-agency mixup?

March 17,  2010   Permalink 

TUESDAY,  MARCH 16,  2010

GOP SOARS IN CONGRESS POLL – AT 8:39 P.M. ET:  Scott Rasmussen reports that the Republicans are now solidly ahead in the generic preferences for Congress:

Republican candidates have now stretched their lead over Democrats to 10 points in the Generic Congressional Ballot, their biggest lead ever in nearly three years of weekly tracking. The GOP has been leading on the ballot for months.

The new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 45% would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate while 35% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent. Voter support for GOP congressional candidates increased slightly from last week, while support for Democrats fell two points.

Republicans started 2010 ahead by nine points, while support for Democrats fell to its lowest level over the same period. Towards the end of 2009, GOP candidates enjoyed a more modest lead over Democrats, with the gap between the two down to four points in early December. Since the beginning of the year, however, the Republican lead hasn’t dipped below seven points.

COMMENT:  Well, that's good, but the election isn't being held today.  Republicans should run as if they're ten points behind.

It's true that Democrats are self-destructing, but their ability to campaign is considerably greater than their ability to govern.  We'll see them in campaign mode in the fall.  Don't underestimate them.

March 16, 2010   Permalink

ELECTION DRAMA IN IRAQ – AT 8:19 P.M. ET:  It seems that politicians have the same complaints all over the world.  Iraq recently held a general election, but the ballots are still being counted.  There are, uh, accuracy issues:

BAGHDAD -- Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki saw his political coalition's lead in Iraq' parlimentary elections slip on Tuesday. He charged that the national electoral commission was manipulating results and demanded a recount in Baghdad, home to the nation's largest group of voters.

"Baghdad" is Arabic for "Chicago."

Maliki's State of Law bloc has seen its lead narrow with 79 percent of the ballots from the March 7 parliamentary elections counted. Its fiercest competition has come from secular Shiite Ayad Allawi, a former prime minister who heads the Iraqiya bloc, favored by Sunni Arabs. News services reported that Allawi's coalition moved ahead in the popular vote count on Tuesday, though it was still behind in the more important province-by-province results, which determine how seats in parliament are apportioned.

It may take months to work this out, but it is democracy, and a democracy that we largely created.  The key now is whether Obama will allow enough American troops to remain in Iraq to keep things stable as the new government is formed.  There are still elements that will try to bring the country back to violence.

But let's not forget that it was President Bush who believed in the surge, against massive ridicule, and saw it through to success.  Obama will not mention that, reflecting the usual gracelessness of this administration. 

March 16, 2010   Permalink

YES, IT'S THAT JOHN ROBERTS – AT 7:37 P.M. ET:  Chief Justice John Roberts recently chided President Obama over the president's criticism, during the State of the Union message, of a Supreme Court decision.  The White House then chided Roberts over his comments.

Will there be a rematch?  There may well be.  It turns out that one of the gimmicks the House leadership is considering for ramming through the health-care bill raises some Constitutional questions.  So if the bill passes, and the president signs it, the whole matter may be dumped before the United States Supreme Court, John Roberts proprietor.  Oh, the justice in it.  The Politico reports:

The so-called “Slaughter solution” for enacting health care reform without a conventional House vote on an identically worded Senate bill would be vulnerable to credible constitutional challenge, experts say.

No lawyer interviewed by POLITICO thought the constitutionality of the “deem and pass” approach being considered by House Democrats was an open-and-shut case either way. But most agreed that it could raise constitutional issues sufficiently credible that the Supreme Court might get interested, as it has in the past.

“If I were advising somebody" on whether deem and pass would run into constitutional trouble "I would say to them, ‘Don’t do it,’” said Alan Morrison, a professor at the George Washington University Law School, who has litigated similar issues before the Supreme Court on behalf of the watchdog organization, Public Citizen. “What does ‘deem’ mean? In class I always say it means ‘let's pretend.’ 'Deems' means it's not true.”

COMMENT:  Now, wouldn't that be something?  The bill passes using the "Slaughter solution," and winds up on Roberts's desk, and the Supreme Court decides it's unconstitutional, 5-4, with Roberts providing the decisive vote.

Do these things only happen in dreams?

March 16, 2010   Permalink

TAKE AWAY HIS PLANE, PARK IT, TAKE THE WINGS OFF – AT 7:08 P.M. ET:  The Democrats are once more griping about the president's travel plans.  This is a crisis of epic proportions:

The White House has been bringing its A game to the final push to pass health care reform – and some House Democrats are so pleased with the shift they want President Barack Obama to postpone his planned Asia trip again if a deal isn’t sealed before his newly announced departure on Sunday.

We just need daddy around to help us.  What's wrong with that?

Several House members interviewed by POLITICO said Obama’s looming trip to Australia, Indonesia and Guam, while creating a natural deadline for 11th-hour health care talks, is once again becoming a problem as he tries to sell reluctant members of his own party on the reform legislation.

Last week, the president pushed back his planned Friday departure three days after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats groused he was leaving at a critical time.

“For the first time in eight months, the president is finally getting his hands dirty, and now he’s going to hop on the plane? Please,” said a Democratic congressman, requesting anonymity.

I've got it!  Obama can cancel his trip, claiming Air Force One is plagued by unintended acceleration problems, and the backup plane isn't stocked with current DVDs.  He can explain this to Indonesia – he speaks the language, after all – and to Australia, which, I suspect, can do without The One's visit.

“These deadlines are sort of silly,” the member added. “Remember the first one? March 18th? That was sort of like putting a calendar on [White House chief of staff] Rahm's [Emanuel’s] back and inviting members to throw darts at him.”

Another Democrat told POLITICO bluntly, “This trip is really getting in the way of things.”

COMMENT:  Translated:  We don't have the votes, we really don't want to try Nancy's convoluted gimmicks, and we sure don't want to go home for Easter and face our constitutents.

Complaining about the president's trip surely doesn't give America confidence that the Congressional leadership is truly in control.

March 16,  2010   Permalink

DR. JONES IS NOW A CARPENTER – AT 9:55 A.M. ET:  One of the remarkable things about the health-care debate is how we've ignored the impact of "reform" on doctors. 

Now, of course, doctors aren't very important to the far left.  In the leftist scheme of things, physicians are simply "vendors" of health care.  On the left, a disciplined individual who went through years of study, internship and residency, is looked upon as a member of the "establishment."  We must be suspicious of these accomplished people.

Well, the New England Journal of Medicine has a devastating account of what may well happen to doctors, and to us, under Obamacare: 

(CNSNews.com) - Nearly one-third of all practicing physicians may leave the medical profession if President Obama signs current versions of health-care reform legislation into law, according to a survey published in the latest issue of the New England Journal of Medicine.

The survey, which was conducted by the Medicus Firm, a leading physician search and consulting firm based in Atlanta and Dallas, found that a majority of physicians said health-care reform would cause the quality of American medical care to “deteriorate” and it could be the “final straw” that sends a sizeable number of doctors out of medicine.

More than 29 percent (29.2) percent of the nearly 1,200 doctors who responded to the survey said they would quit the profession or retire early if health reform legislation becomes law. If a public option were included in the legislation, as several liberal Senators have indicated they would like, the number would jump to 45.7 percent.

And...

The medical journal published the results in its March and April edition, saying: “While a sudden loss of half of the nation's physicians seems unlikely, a very dramatic decrease in the physician workforce could become a reality as an unexpected side effect of health reform.”

COMMENT:  I wonder if any of these physicians was consulted on the health plan.  Probably not.  Who needs the input of those who actually treat patients? 

We are heading for a catastrophe, and those heading us there are ecstatic.  The Utopian dream is about to be realized.  Unfortunately, it's only a dream.

March 16, 2010   Permalink

TOYOTA FIGHTS BACK – AT 9:28 A.M. ET:  Toyota doesn't need our help to defend it.  But the truth needs our help to defend it.  The tendency of the mainstream media to bash corporations and exalt "victims" has led to a distortion of reality.  There are bad corporations, and good ones.  There are real victims, and false ones.

Toyota's first response to the "unintended acceleration" claims was the response of a corporation trying to prove it was responsible.  There were immediate, massive recalls.  The president of the company went around, Obama-like, apologizing.  There was all that Japanese bowing.

But as we've learned more and more, we realize that the truth is more elusive.  Yesterday we ran a report pointing out that "unintended acceleration," presumably a defect in cars, is actually related quite closely to the age of the driver.  (Everyone knows that Toyotas don't like older people.)  And Toyota itself, apparently realizing that was about to be hustled by lawsuits, is starting to strike back, as AP reports:

SAN DIEGO | Toyota Motor Corp. dismissed the story of a man who claimed his Prius sped out of control on the California freeway, saying Monday that its own tests found the car's gas pedal and backup safety system were working fine.

The automaker stopped short of saying James Sikes had staged a hoax last week but asserted that his account did not square with a series of tests it conducted on the gas-electric hybrid.

"We have no opinion on his account, what he's been saying, other than that the scenario is not consistent with the technical findings," spokesman Mike Michels said at a press conference.

It turned out that Sikes has a checkered past and a poor reputation in business.

There have been charges that much of the Toyota "scandal" was cooked up by General Motors and its government allies, but I've seen no direct proof of that. 

The fact is that we go through periodic "unintended acceleration" scares, just as we go through other kinds of "scares" that turn out to be greatly exaggerated.  Remember the swine-flu epidemic? 

We'll continue to follow this.  We saw the Audi destroyed in the United States by sensationalist reporting over "unintended acceleration" that didn't exist.  That cost a lot of jobs.  If a product truly is defective, action obviously must be taken.  But beware the false charge, and the financial interests behind it.

March 16, 2010    Permalink

THE RAIN'S A PAIN, BUT THE CAUSE IS PLAIN – GLOBAL WARMING IS ITS NAME – AT 8:35 A.M. ET:  Al Gore speaks, and the flock listens.  From the Business and Media Institute:

If there’s a drought – it’s global warming. When there’s a hurricane – it’s global warming. If there are heavy snows or even blizzards – it’s somehow global warming. And amazingly, the latest round of rainy and windy weather in the Northeast, well that’s consistent with this phenomenon as well, so says former Vice President Al Gore.

Gore, the self-anointed climate change alarmist-in-chief, told supporters on a March 15 conference call that severe weather in certain regions of the country could be attributed to carbon in the atmosphere – including the recent rash of rainy weather.

“[T]he odds have shifted toward much larger downpours,” Gore said. “And we have seen that happen in the Northeast, we’ve seen it happen in the Northwest – in both of those regions are among those that scientists have predicted for a long time would begin to experience much larger downpours.”

But Gore had a specific example in mind. He explained this recent soaking in the Northeastern United States was “consistent” with what global warming alarmists were projecting.

“Just look at what has been happening for the last three days,” Gore said. “The so-called skeptics haven’t noted it because it’s not snow. But the downpours and heavy winds are consistent with what the scientists have long warned about.”

COMMENT:  Some of the "scientists" tell us that, no matter what the weather aberration, it's caused by global warming.

Look, we had a bad storm in the northeast over the weekend.  But I've seen worse storms here. 

Maybe it's time to give the "global warming" thing a rest until some real scientists can examine the data, conduct convincing experiments, and end these farcical "sky is falling" campaigns.

March 16, 2010   Permalink

THE VOTE COUNT – AT 8:08 A.M. ET:  No one knows exactly what the vote count is for health "reform."  We reported last night that some news sources were saying that the Dems were five votes or so short in the House.  Some Dems are putting a good face on it, or a frown if you prefer, and saying they already have the votes to pass the measure, but they aren't being taken seriously. 

Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan, leader of the Democratic pro-life forces, believes the kamikazes aren't really close to victory.  From The Hill:

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) said Monday he thinks House Democratic leaders are not close to having the votes to pass health reform.

In an interview with Fox News' Greta Van Susteren, the anti-abortion rights lawmaker said, "I'd be surprised if they have 200 votes."

House Democratic leaders need 216 to pass the bill.

Stupak noted that he is not counting votes with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her lieutenants, calling his figure "a guesstimate."

Democratic leaders have a very different vote count, claiming they have, or are very close, to having the votes to pass a bill.

The Washington Examiner, in an editorial, notes that the deal making continues, even though Democratic leaders have said there'll be no more changes to their main bill.  There are those nasty little special provisions inserted to get the votes of senators and congressmen:

Last week, Obama said he wanted them removed. But over the weekend, White House senior aide David Axelrod waffled when asked about the deals, saying Obama now only objects to deals that only apply to one state: "The principle that we want to apply is that, are these [deals] applicable to all states? Even if they do not qualify now, would they qualify under certain sets of circumstances?" According to AP, "that is the argument made earlier by aides to Democratic Sens. Max Baucus of Montana and Chris Dodd of Connecticut. The measure to give Medicare coverage to asbestos-sickened residents of Libby, Mont., for example, could apply to other places where public health emergencies are declared -- even though Libby is the only place where that has happened so far."

Change we can believe in.  What a disgrace.

March 16, 2010   Permalink

HUH? – AT 7:58 A.M. ET:  According to Democratic fantasies, we are no more than four days away from changing one sixth of the American economy, without a single Republican vote in support. 

The news is filled with reports of gimmicks that the Dems may pull to try to get health "reform" passed.  Get this one, from this morning's Washington Post:

After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate's health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.

Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers "deem" the health-care bill to be passed.

What a racket.  This device would be used if Pelosi doesn't have the votes to pass the entire bill.  This is an insult to the whole notion of democracy.  Not only will the bill not have any GOP support, it won't have enough Democratic support actually to pass. 

On this your health care may depend.

Please note the use of the term, "sleight of hand."  This is the Washington Post, a liberal paper.

The tactic -- known as a "self-executing rule" or a "deem and pass" -- has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

Do you believe what you're reading?  The woman admits to the crime.

We're watching this unfold hour by hour.  As Americans, we should be ashamed.

March 16,  2010   Permalink