Yesterday, Missouri voters sent a shockwave through the White House. Since passing ObamaCare against the will of the American people, public opinion polls have showed a continued drop in public support for the Democrats’ government takeover of the nation’s health care. President Obama has initiated a nationwide public relations campaign to improve national opinion of ObamaCare through the sheer force of his charisma but to no avail. The more the president speaks of the bill, the larger the majority of Americans opposed to it grows. Just days ago, a federal judge delivered another blow to ObamaCare by allowing a Virginia-based lawsuit that is challenging the constitutionality of the bill to proceed despite the White House’s effort to have the case dismissed. As if things were not going bad enough for ObamaCare, the voters of Missouri met at the polls and approved Proposition C, a bill to exempt Missouri residents from one of the basic aspects of ObamaCare which is forcing Americans to purchase insurance plans approved by the federal government. Missouri’s ballot initiative was the first chance voters have had to explicitly state their opposition to ObamaCare at the ballot box. An overwhelming 71% of Missouri voters did just that by voting in favor of Proposition C. Sure, Republican Scott Brown’s victory in the race to fill Senator Ted Kennedy’s seat spelled danger for ObamaCare, especially since Brown campaigned as the 41^st vote against it but Democrats were able to tell themselves that there were many other issues besides health care that contributed to Brown’s victory. However, the Missouri vote leaves no question to the voters’ opinion of ObamaCare.

There is already an effort to explain away yesterday’s election results. The reasoning has seemed to follow these main themes:  It was just a primary election in a cycle that conservatives were most energized in a state that McCain won in 2008. Besides, primaries always have lower voter turnout and if it had been on the November ballot the results would have been different.

Had Proposition C had passed by a margin of 10% or even 15%, any of these excuses may carry water. However, the vote was 71% in favor of Proposition C and 29% against. This was a complete landslide. Approximately 577,600 Republicans voted in the primary and there were approximately 316,000 votes cast for Democrat candidates. Another roughly 5,500 ballots were cast with no party affiliation. The Proposition C results show that Republicans weren’t solely responsible for the bill’s passage. Instead, about one-sixth of the Democrats voted in favor of Prop C. Had the issue been on the November ballot as its supporters originally wanted only to be blocked by Democrats who demanded it appear in the primary election, there is no doubt it would have easily passed.

Then, of course, there will also be the usual, desperate charges from Obama and his Democrat minions that the lopsided election result was the product of a severe and intensive “disinformation campaign” from Republicans and the evil special interests who want to deny most Americans access to health care. Who knows, we may even hear Missouri described as a state of racists. Unfortunately for the White House and Democrats, the more Americans learn about the specifics of ObamaCare, the less they approve of it.

The Show Me State came through huge yesterday and, hopefully, showed other states the path to resist the Democrat attempts to inject themselves into every aspect of Americans’ lives.

MSNBC cast off any final remnants of credibility when discussing their horror over a man in Arizona legally wearing an AR-15 rifle and a pistol to the rally. In Arizona, residents are able to openly carry legally-owned firearms in plain view without any special permits. Liberals became inflamed at video of a protestor bringing firearms to the rally in order to make a political statement about Americans’ Second Amendment rights. Contessa Brewer of MSNBC charged that the weapons were indications of the racist motivations driving protests to President Obama’s health care reform plans. She said, “’A man at a pro-health care reform rally…wore a semiautomatic assault rifle on his shoulder and a pistol on his hip….there are questions about whether this has racial overtones….white people showing up with guns.” (Emphasis added.) Her statement was accompanied by a video which was obviously edited to “prove” her point. What was so obvious about the editing job of the video? The video clip failed to show a trait of the armed man that completely disproves Brewer’s assessment – the man carrying the firearms was black. This bit of information that MSNBC conveniently left out of their reports shows how far the network will go to push their love for B. Hussein Obama onto, what they perceive to be, an unsuspecting, uninformed, and gullible population.

Below is the video from Brewer’s “report”:

Here’s a picture of the man carrying the firearms. He doesn’t exactly seem to be part of Brewer’s “white people showing up with guns” crowd.  

This is a full shot of Brewer's "white people showing up with guns." From seeing a full picture of the man in MSNBC's cropped video, it's pretty clear that he's not exactly your typical Klansman.

I don’t necessarily agree with this guy’s decision to bring firearms to the event in order to make a political point. As MSNBC has quickly proven, the Obama-freaks in the media are looking for any excuse to label opponents to the president’s plans as violent extremists. However, since the man wasn’t wearing a purple SEIU shirt or a red ACORN shirt, I don’t think he posed much of a threat to the crowd. Even the Secret Service working security at the Arizona event said that they were not worried at all about Obama’s well-being. The armed man stayed in the designated area for protestors and was never anywhere near a position to harm the president.

MSNBC is not a source of any type of honest, serious journalism. Instead, they are just a middle man that the White House and other far-left groups use to push their propaganda into the airwaves. It’s pretty clear that Chris Matthews isn’t the only person in the studio who gets thrills up his leg when Obama speacks. Maybe this is why their ratings continue to plummet every month. Is it any surprise that NBC’s parent company, GE, is run by Jeffrey Immelt who was and continues to be a large supporter of B. Hussein Obama? GE stands to profit greatly from Obama’s push for government-subsidized solar and wind power since the company is one of the largest producers of wind turbines. MSNBC seems to be providing their end of the bargain in this “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” relationship.

However, before we pass judgment on this man’s decision to bring his weapons, we might want to recall Kenneth Gladney’s story in St. Louis. Gladney was brutally beaten by Democrat union goons because he was a black conservative. Maybe this man in Arizona was motivated by racism -fear of racist Democrat goons looking to crack the skull of everyone who doesn’t tolerate opposing political views, especially from members of minority groups who don’t support liberalism. Even the Supreme Court recognized a right to self defense, even against politically-connected union thugs. 

White House website instructs supporters to tattle on anyone spreading "disinformation" about health care reform, in other words, anyone telling the truth about ObamaCare is going to be monitored by the totalitarian B. Hussein Obama regime.

The White House has officially entered the creepy Orwellian world described in 1984. With polls showing that support for the president’s health care reform is quickly deteriorating, President Obama and the Democrats are launching a full attack on anyone publically criticizing their plans to hijack the nation’s health care industry. Congressional Democrats were sent home for the August recess with orders to hold town hall meetings in order to convince the unwashed masses that they’re concerns are completely baseless. Now B. Hussein Obama is asking supporters to forward any emails spreading “disinformation” about the health care plans to an official White House email address which, conveniently, does not have to respond to Freedom of Information requests. No doubt, emails forwarded to the White House will also contain the email addresses of everyone else on the forward. Yet, we will have no recourse to learn how this information is being used by the White House. The same group that complained about the government program to intercept calls to suspected terrorists overseas was unconstitutional is now completely silent as Obama is ordering people to forward constitutionally-protected political speech to his office so the offending parties and their messages can be monitored. This is totalitarian despotism that further shows B. Hussein Obama’s contempt for a truly free American populace and the lengths he will go to in order to quiet any dissent. Americans cannot let actions like this silence their frustrations. Instead, they must speak louder and more often to expose the hypocrisy of the liberals who are currently pushing through an agenda that will permanently kill individual liberty in the United States.

Yesterday, White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, was asked about the recent uprising of angry Americans voicing discontent with current health care reform efforts. ABC’s Jake Tapper asked, “Is it the White House’s contention that the anger at some members of Congress are experiencing at town hall meetings especially over health care reform is manufactured?” Gibbs responded, “I think some of it is, yes. In fact, I think you had groups today that, ah, Conservatives for Patients’ Rights, that have bragged about organizing and manufacturing that anger.” The same president who began his career as a community organizer whose purpose was to whip community groups into an angry frenzy is now marginalizing anyone who publically states their opposition to the administration’s freedom-choking agenda.

As angry Americans voice concern across the nation, the White House and congressional Democrats are labeling all protestors as tools of the health care industry and insurance companies. MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, who happens to get thrills up his leg when Obama speaks, asked liberal Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer about, what Matthews characterized as “these Brooks Brothers attacks on these congressional meetings.” Boxer explained, “I think it is definitely is the right-wing in this country trying to hurt this president and hurt this Congress. They’re out there playing politics with it.” Other reports of town hall uprisings have described angry citizens as “angry mobs” and referred to them as an “Astroturf” movement, inferring that the protestors are motivated and organized by special interests from the health care industry and their anger voiced at town hall meetings isn’t genuine.

In order to further attack anyone opposing his agenda, B. Hussein Obama has posted instructions on his website to pass along any “disinformation” to the White House. The White House website says, “There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversations. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.” This is an outright corrupt and illegal attack, on First Amendment rights of common Americans who have grown frustrated at an administration and Congress who insist on acting in direct contrast to the will of the People. Writing on Redstate.com, Erick Erickson described the most frightening aspect of B. Hussein Obama’s tactics to quiet any dissent through pitting Americans against each other. Erickson wrote, “According to 5 U.S.C. § 552a, United States agencies, including the Executive Office of the President shall, “maintain no record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity.” He also points out that any emails forwarded to the White House will not be subject to Freedom of Information Act requests. Therefore, unless Congress decides to stand up for the American People’s Constitutional Rights, we will never know the extent which the White House uses the information gathered. This is illegal, immoral, and the type of coercion typical of totalitarian despotic regimes.

Americans cannot be frightened or deterred from the slander and illegal surveillance coming out of Washington Democrats. After the mass uprisings that have been broadcast across the nation, congressional Democrats are now canceling scheduled town hall meetings. Apparently, they believe that if they don’t confront the anger, it doesn’t really exist. They can’t get off the hook this easily. Email, call, fax, or visit your representatives’ and senators’ offices and let them know that they cannot support hijacking the nation’s health care system and expect to remain in office. Be civilized but firm. The honest anger of average Americans at their elected officials is a powerful force. Through contacting our representatives and articulating our anger in a civilized, calm, and rational way, the message will eventually penetrate our legislators’ thick skulls. Do not give the left any ammo of examples of unruly mobs shouting everyone down. Remain civilized but do not remove the passion and conviction of your arguments from the exchange. It’s time elected officials realize that they are elected to represent the American people, not lord over them. Democrats have been explaining that opposition to health care plans is based on ignorance because the protestors don’t know what is best for them. This attitude is intolerable from our elected representatives and it is time that they know we will not allow people with this attitude to remain in office.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg wins the first "Absolute Dumbest Statement Award" for completely disregarding reality and reason.

This is a hard feat to accomplish so Michael Bloomberg deserves some credit. With so many utterly idiotic statements that run completely contrary to reality, it’s hard to say something so stupid that it deserves the title of “Absolute Dumbest Statement.” In explaining his opposition to Republican Senator John Thune’s amendment to the hate crimes bill currently before the Senate that would have allowed concealed carry permit holders to carry across state lines into other states allowing for concealed carry permits, Michael Bloomberg turned up the scare tactics and completely disregarded any piece of actual reality. Bloomberg said, “Criminals will be able to obtain concealed carry permits and walk the streets carrying handguns.”

 

What the hell are you talking about Michael?!? Is Bloomberg so stupid to think that Thune’s amendment would suddenly open the door for criminals to carry handguns across state lines? In order to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon, applicants are subjected to thorough background checks and most states also require about 8 hours of training and testing to prove the applicant’s knowledge and ability of how to safely handle and shoot a weapon. On the other hand, criminals don’t apply for permits and just tuck their handgun into their belts and head out the door. In fact, it’s this criminal tendency that causes most concealed weapons permit holders to obtain their permits. The only way that concealed carry permits would increase the number of criminals carrying handguns would be for inept politicians like Michael Bloomberg to outlaw legal concealed carry permits like Bloomberg does in the city of New York.

For his complete disregard for reality and logic, congratulations Michael Bloomberg. You have just made the “Absolute Dumbest Statement.” Unfortunately, with B. Hussein, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid running the show, Bloomberg probably won’t hold his title for very long.

Not satisfied with the economic destruction he's already brought to the US, Barney Frank wants even more control.

President Obama keeps insisting that he doesn’t want to run banks, auto manufacturers, health care providers, or control executive compensation. Too bad his actions don’t match up with his words, which is quickly becoming the theme of B. Hussein Obama’s presidency. This week, Obama appointed Kenneth Feinberg as “pay czar” with the explicit purpose of reigning in executive compensation along with reviewing the salaries of the top 100 highest paid employees of companies that have received government money. Currently, the White House is claiming to only be concerned with firms receiving federal assistance, a list that grows with every new policy and power grab orchestrated by the Obama administration. However, from listening to the President and congressional Democrats, it’s obvious that they are seeking to expand their powers to dictate compensation rates to all industries and companies, regardless of whether they have taken federal money. It is curious how none of these politicians seem concerned about how much money they personally receive from the taxpayers during an economic downturn; especially since they have voted themselves a pay raise since the economic downturn.

Wednesday, the administration pet pay limits on companies receiving TARP money. Citing executive compensation as a primary driver of the economic recession, the White House is also seeking legislation which would limit executive compensation at all publically traded companies through nonbinding shareholder votes and less management influence. Interestingly, the White House doesn’t seem to have a problem with groups like ACORN and Democrats on the take such as Senator Chris Dodd, Representative Barney Frank, and even Obama himself pressuring banks to exponentially increase their loans to low income and minority lenders regardless of low credit scores or proof of income requirements. Does the President see a problem in the millions taken from Fannie and Freddie by his own campaign and administration advisors when they sat on the board of directors for the companies during the height of the subprime buildup such as Franklin Raines, Jim Johnson, and Rahm Emanuel?

Today, Democrats such as Barney Frank are pushing for the government to do more. “I do differ with the administration in that hope springs eternal and their position seems to be that if we strengthen the compensation committees we will do better,” Frank told the Associated Press. In another interview with CNBC, Frank threw a hissy fit and announced that the interview was over because the interviewer would not merely let him set up the classic Democrat straw man claiming that the only options are either to undertake the Democrat plans or do nothing at all. This is the same accusation made about opponents to the ill-fated stimulus package. The President and his Democrat allies accused Republicans and conservatives questioning the effectiveness of the stimulus by stating that they are instead advocating that the government does nothing to help the economy. Meanwhile, Republicans designed a stimulus package that forecasted twice the job growth at half of the cost according to Obama economic advisor, Christina Romer’s models which were used to predict the effectiveness of the Democrat plan passed.

Government has already done enough damage to the nation’s economy by trying to dictate business practices. Democrats have their fingerprints all over the main causes of the subprime collapse. Instead of learning from their mistakes, they are using the crisis they played a large part to create in order to expand their own control and meddle even further in the private sector while shredding the Constitution.

Attorney General Eric Holder is quickly become Obama's "election-fixer-in-chief."

American Thinker has uncovered a story about Attorney General Eric Holder’s instructions to the state of Georgia to end their voter ID programs. Rick Moran of AM, explains that Loretta King from the Justice Department sent a letter to Georgia authorities claiming that voter ID laws are “frequently inaccurate and has a “discriminatory effect” on minority voters.” King’s letter goes on to state, “This flawed system frequently subjects a disproportionate number of African-American, Asian and/or Hispanic voters to additional, and more importantly, erroneous burdens on the right to register to vote.” In promoting the standard liberal nonsensical argument against requiring voters to prove their identity, the Obama administration is continuing its assault on free, valid elections. However, this action by the Justice Department is defying Supreme Court precedent and a blatant example of B. Hussein Obama’s lawless power grab.

On August 28, 2008, the Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 in favor of Indiana’s voter identification laws. As John Fund points out in his book, Stealing Elections,” even Justice Stephen Breyer who is traditionally one of the most liberal justices said that even he would have affirmed the Indiana voter ID laws had they been more similar to the voter ID laws of Georgia. (Emphasis mine.) That’s correct; AG Holder is telling Georgia, a state with ID requirements less stringent than Indiana’s laws which were affirmed in a Supreme Court decision, to cease their voter ID requirements before the 2010 election. Indiana and Georgia’s voter ID laws have been determined constitutional. However, a thug US attorney general dictating that a state drop laws enacted through the proper state legislative procedures is highly unconstitutional. This is another stunning example of B. Hussein Obama’s complete disregard for the rule of law and his continuous morphing from an elected President of the United States of America to a two-bit thug dictator of the likes found in banana republics. (Coincidently, Obama is also transforming the American economy to the stability of a third-world banana republic.)

Loretta King’s letter paints a picture of poor minorities being turned away from the polls because they can’t afford to purchase a government-issued ID. There are a couple of things wrong with this idea. The first is that during the challenges to both Indiana and Georgia’s voter ID laws, liberal groups claiming disenfranchisement over the law failed to find a single person unable to obtain identification. Both states subsidize ID’s for low-income residents who may not otherwise be able to purchase one. None of the groups who claimed that there are hundreds of thousands of disenfranchised voters because of the ID requirements could produce one single witness who was actually disenfranchised. Every witness admitted during the depositions that since the ID’s were free, they could easily obtain one.

The only reason left to fight the ID requirement at the polls is that it hinders vote fraud. As ACORN artificially inflates voter rolls across the nation through swamping election authorities with fraudulent registrations and looser mail in and absentee requirements make it easier than ever to fraudulently vote, identification laws are a strong tool to preserve the legitimacy of American elections. Through forcing states to abandon these laws, the Obama administration is securing the vote for illegal immigrants, felons, and others not eligible to legally vote. All of the subgroups who will have more illegal access to the polls also overwhelmingly vote for Democrats.

AG Holder has already dismissed a lawsuit filed against Missouri because the state failed to take any efforts to purge deceased voters or voters who moved to a new jurisdiction from the state’s voting registration rolls. One Missouri county showed it had 153% more voters registered than actual voting-age people living there. Last week, the Justice Department ordered its career attorneys to drop charges against three members of the New Black Panther Party who were caught on video wearing military fatigues with one wielding a police-style nightstick in front of a Philadelphia polling place during the 2008 election. These men stood right in front of the door to the poll and used racial taunts and intimidation on anyone not supporting B. Hussein Obama for president. One voter was told, “Get ready to be ruled by the black man, cracker.” After the charges were filed in court, none of the men appeared for their court dates which led to a default judgment against them. However, before proceeding further, the Justice Department attorneys were ordered by Obama appointees to drop the case. Therefore, these three men got away scot-free. The only slap on the wrist was an order against the man holding the nightstick that he was not to display a weapon within 100 feet of a polling place until November 13, 2012. (As I’ve stated before, why in the hell would there be a time-line on that order?!? No one is ever supposed to wield weapons outside of a polling place to intimidate voters.) Congress has also determined that there is no reason to investigation ACORN even though the organization and its employees have been charged with voter registration fraud in 14 states – and that’s just from the 2008 election.

Voter registration fraud, voter intimidation, and vote fraud have all now been condoned by the Obama administration. Not even the Supreme Court seems to be a deterrent to the Obama administration as they continue to flaunt the Constitution and exponentially increase their own power and authority.

Obama found his ideal "empathetic" candidate in Judge Sotomayor. She's notorious for not letting the Constitution guide her decisions.

Since the White House is already cautioning Republicans on their objections to Supreme Court Nominee Sonia Sotomayor, it might be a good time to reach back into the archives and show the “caution” showed by Democrats during the nomination process of Miguel Estrada to the DC Court. While Sotomayor’s nomination results in Republicans being cautioned about how they protest her nomination or else they will offend the Latin American vote, it seems that Democrats weren’t so keen on their own advice back in November of 2001 as they began filibustering judicial appointments.

The Wall Street Journal republished some of the Democrats’ “finer” quotes regarding their partisan attacks on judicial nominations. Illinois Senator, Dick Durbin explained on November 7, 2001 when discussing the interest groups’ protest over certain Bush judicial nominees for political reasons:

“They also identified Migual Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous, because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment. They want to hold Estrada off as long as possible.” (Emphasis added.)

One can only wonder what Democrat Senator and former KKK member Robert Byrd was thinking while shaking hands with Miguel Estrada before Democrats denied his appointment because "he's latino." They're certainly a tolerant bunch.

This is just one example of Democrats’ “cautionary” approach to protesting Bush judicial nominations. Anyone recalling these battles remembers that Senate Democrats did not buy into the idea that the presidential election victory meant that the president has carte blanche authority on who he appoints to the courts. Now, Democrats seem to be falling all over themselves to shout “elections have consequences.”

Republicans will not oppose Sotomayor merely on the basis that she’s Latina. Instead, they are concerned about her statements about the appellate courts making policy, her feelings that as a Latina woman she feels her legal rulings are superior to “white males,” and her record of having 60% of her appellate court decisions eventually overturned in cases heard by the Supreme Court. It doesn’t appear she is applying the law too well and has no business in the federal court system, much less receiving a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

Republicans need to oppose this appointment at all costs, regardless of their critics’ advice. The party does not need to play identity politics. The GOP will never beat Democrats at that game and it goes against the universal equality message at the heart of the Republican Party. Obama’s idea of judging through “empathy” will make the nation take two steps back away from Republican Martin Luther King, Jr.’s vision of a “colorblind society.” Instead Republicans should apply their fundamental principles consistently no matter what the subject is. That’s how they will once again start winning elections. Sotomayor has given plenty of material to her opponents and, unlike Democrat opposition to Miguel Estrada, none of the Republican concerns are based on her Latina heritage.

Obama’s pick for the Supreme Court believes that policies are made in the apellate courts? This is the type of activism that threatens the sovereignty of the Constitution. Judge Sonia Stotomayor represents the first step to B. Hussein Obama’s goal of shaping the courts to create laws for his agenda when he can’t obtain approval through the legislative process. Stotomayor is an awful pick that will have disastrous consequences for the American political system.

For the first time since they began tracking results of the issue in 1995, Gallup released the results of their latest poll which showed that a majority of Americans now classify themselves as pro-life. Among those polled, 51 percent stated they were pro-life compared to 42 percent who stated they were pro-choice.

Specter the Defector claimed that GOP is too far right for most Americans.

This is a sharp shift in attitude from last year’s poll which found 50 percent pro-choice versus 44 percent pro-life. As liberal pundits are pointing to the election losses in 2006 and 2008 as the death of conservatism and claim that the GOP needs to move to the center before they will win any more elections, this poll stands as a striking rebuttal to the contrary.

Upon announcing his defection to the Democrat Party, Arlen Specter claimed that the Republican Party had moved too far to the ideological right and he no longer held the same values. Colin Powell has echoed these claims as he explains that the GOP needs to listen more to “moderates” like himself and Specter instead of more staunchly conservative figures such as Rush Limbaugh. Powell has received plenty of harsh rebukes for his criticism of Republicans since he supported B. Hussein Obama as president despite the fact that Republicans ran the very moderate John McCain who is the exact type of candidate Powell claims the party needs. (more…)

Thomas Sowell wrote a great article posted to National Reveiw today about Obama’s claim that he wants to find a Supreme Court nominee who will show “empathy” in issuing opinions. I’ve been wanting to write something along the same lines but Sowell sums it up much better than I would be able to.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjNhMWFhZGIxNWFlNjNkMjQ2MmY5ZjA5ZWI1YWQ3NjU=