Remember the Healthcare Alamo
March 24, 2010
On March 6, 1836 General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna stormed the Alamo recapturing the mission-turned-fort for the Mexican Army. The fall of the Alamo was due to… well, the number of fighters. A series of events leading up to the battle (caused in large part by a general feeling that the Mexicans would not be back anytime soon) resulted in a 200 man defense stationed at the Alamo against a Mexican force of several thousand.
Much to the surprise of the commanders at the Alamo, General Santa Anna arrived with thousands of Mexican troops on February 23rd. Instead of surrendering, the small force decided to hold down the fort and pray reinforcements would arrive before the Mexicans could take it back. Reinforcements did not arrive in time and all defenders of the Alamo were slain including such famous American figures as David Crocket and James Bowie. There simply were not enough of them to hold off the much more numerous Mexican forces.
Upon notification of the fate of the Alamo’s defenders, General Sam Houston had no choice but to retreat until he had enough troops to face Santa Anna’s well-trained army. Finally, on April 21st with a force of approximately 1,200, Houston caught up to Santa Anna at the Battle of San Jacinto. It took 18 minutes for Houston’s army to take the field and win the battle. The next day Santa Anna was captured and agreed to remove all Mexican troops from Texas — later recognizing Texas’s independence.
The similarities between the Battle of the Alamo and the battle over government-run healthcare thus far have been amazing. For example, the original troop count at the Alamo was around 170 with 32 reinforcements coming in from Gonzales shortly after the Mexicans arrived. In the House of Representatives, each of the 178 Republicans voted against the Senate’s version of a healthcare overhaul bill with 34 Democrat reinforcements joining them.
Additionally, the Republicans in both houses of Congress along with the majority of American people have held back the health care assault for about 13 months now, symbolic of the 13 day standoff at the Alamo.
And just as the fall of the Alamo was an unfortunate result of troop numbers, so was the case with the passage of health care “reform” and the vote count. The defenders of the republic just did not have enough people in office to vote against this legislation and — with the shameless, Chicago-style tactics of the White House and Democrat leadership — its passage was inevitable.
After having lost the Alamo and 200 men in such a brutal fashion, Sam Houston surely wanted to attack Santa Anna’s army right away, but he had to wait until he could raise the number of enlisted men to do so properly. Houston’s prudent strategy enabled him to win the Battle of San Jacinto in swift and devastating fashion. Likewise, the American people are forced to wait until November to vote their reinforcements into office, and it is expected that Republicans will win the 2010 mid-term elections in a comparable way to Houston at San Jacinto.
This is where hope relies on the continuation of similarities between these two battles though.
The November elections are a far way off yet and Democrats will no doubt try changing the subject to new, more popular agenda items immediately after passing this atrocious law to try and get back in the good graces of the public before votes are cast at the ballot box. The assumption is that the public will have a short attention span and forget about the health care process if Democrats can finally be seen as focusing their attention on job creating initiatives. If Democrats could spin a convincing argument that they are acting to improve economic conditions, many of them may stand a chance of holding on to their seats.
While the general public can at times demonstrate a short attention span, it is not likely the Democrats’ strategy will work. The problem being that the health care legislation will have the immediate effect of destroying existing jobs as well as untold amounts of future jobs with increases in taxes and regulation. Furthermore the Bush tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2010 adding to the massive tax increases the new health care entitlement will create. There is reason to believe the expiration of these tax increases will come into play around election time, since expectations of future costs play a large role in businesses offloading employees. Short of renewing the Bush tax cuts, there is nothing the Democrats can do that will mitigate the negative effects they are having on the economy and the prosperity of average voting citizens.
Moreover, countless lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the health care legislation will be filed once the bill is signed. These suits will be commanding headlines continuously between now and November, and will eventually get to the Supreme Court. As the threat of a decision to overturn the bill gains ground, Americans will be aware and engaged. Having the health care overhaul challenged in the courts will be a strong negative for Democrat candidates and will keep the attention of their constituents focused on voting them out.
Just as Texan soldiers cried out “Remember the Alamo!” at the Battle of San Jacinto, current outrage needs to be kept fresh in the minds of the disapproving public in order to see the predicted mid-term election defeat through to its end. While it is not likely that Republicans can gain enough seats to repeal the bill and override a veto from President Obama, majorities in both houses can be won and the bleeding can be stopped.
The Battle of the Alamo was a heroic fight that played a pivotal role in the eventual addition of Texas to the union, but it was a costly and devastating loss at the time. Fourteen years went by before the U.S. Army rebuilt the fortifications at the Alamo after being destroyed by Mexican troops who were ordered out. Here’s hoping it does not take quite as long to rebuild what the Democrats have destroyed since last January.
Obama’s Army Is Going AWOL
February 20, 2010
The “Millennial Generation” of young voters, many of whom comprise one of the President’s most devoted political action committees, Organizing For America, who were a major factor in Barack Obama being elected President in 2008 are not “feeling the love” for the Democratic party that they once had.
In 2008, party affiliation among young voters who “leaned to” one party or another favored Democrats over Republicans by a margin of 62% to 30%.
By 2010 the margin has shrunk to 54% Democrat, 40% Republican.
In February 2009, 73% of Millennials approved of President Obama’s job performance.
Just one year later, in February 2010, only 57% of Millennials give Obama a positive rating.
Sounds like the Millennials “liberal love” is fading.
How do Millennials compare to the political leanings of other age groups?
Among Generation X’ers, 38% described their political views as moderate and 38% said they were conservative; only 20% described themselves as liberal.
More Baby Boomers and members of the Silent Generation described their political views as conservative than moderate; 43% of Baby Boomer voters said they are conservative, 36% described themselves as moderate and only 18% said they are liberal. Similarly, 45% of voters in the Silent Generation described their views as conservative, 35% as moderate and 15% said they are liberal.
After such a strong showing of support for liberal values in 2008, the tide among younger voters may be shifting.
In the fourth quarter of 2009, as many Millennial voters identified themselves as liberals (29%) as conservatives (28%), while 40% said they are moderates.
So what does all of this mean for younger voters future support of President Obama, Democrat political candidates, and liberalism in general?
Sir Winston Churchill said it best:
“If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a consevative at forty you have no brain.”
Source: Pew Research Center
Dick Cheney Visits CPAC
February 19, 2010
Former Vice-President Dick Cheney made a surprise appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
Cheney was warmly received by the crowd at CPAC, the annual Washington D.C gathering where the leaders of the conservative movement, as well as the rank-and-file members, gather to discuss strategy and policy.
Cheney cited recent election results in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts as encouraging signs for conservatives’ future prospects.
And one particular remark of Cheney’s during his address gained him a standing ovation.
Congress Hit With A Capitol Offense
February 18, 2010
A recent CNN poll revealed just how fed up Americans are with their members of Congress:
Only 1/3 of voters think that their particular members of Congress should be returned next year.
Sixty three percent of voters polled are against re-electing members of the House and Senate whose terms will be up this year.
The anger seems to be equally directed between Democrats and Republicans, however this is worse news for the Democrats as they have more seats at risk in the 2010 elections.
And the voters of Massachusetts sending Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate may have sent a message that the Democrats won’t want to hear.
Yet with the general feeling among the electorate, regardless of political affiliation, leaning towards “throw the bums out”, the Republicans shouldn’t become too smug.
Democrats Cave In, Will Seat Scott Brown
February 4, 2010
It’s time for Teddy’s seat warmer to fing a new place to sit.
Sen.-elect Scott Brown of Massachusetts on Wednesday demanded to be seated immediately, saying that while he was set to be sworn in Feb. 11, there are a number of votes scheduled prior to that date — votes that, once he is seated, Republicans can defeat.
Democrats, seeking to avoid a prolonged battle over seating a duly elected senator, quickly assented.
In a letter from Mr. Brown’s attorney to Gov. Deval Patrick and Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin — both Democrats — Mr. Brown argued that the results of the special election in Massachusetts on Jan. 19 are not in doubt. While Senator-elect Brown had tentatively planned to be sworn into office February 11, he has been advised that there are a number of votes scheduled prior to that date, For that reason, he wants certification to occur immediately, wrote his attorney, Daniel B. Winslow. As he is the duly elected United States Senator from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, he is entitled to be seated now.
The lawyer asked that the results of the Jan. 19 special election be certified without delay and no later than 11 a.m. Thursday, in time to allow Senator-elect Brown to be administered the oath of office by the Vice President tomorrow afternoon. Hours before Mr. Brown’s demand, Mr. Galvin delivered official copies of the election results to the Governor’s Council. Mr. Patrick’s staff announced that the governor would sign Mr. Brown’s election certificate in the council’s presence — as is required by law — during a ceremony at 9:30 a.m. Thursday.
Scott Brown Is Elected, Not Allowed To Vote In The Senate
January 31, 2010
In the past few days, the Senate has voted on three major pieces of legislation:
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke’s confirmation.
Establishing spending caps.
Raising the federal debt ceiling.
In these and other matters that have been voted on in the Senate since Brown’s election, the Senator from Massachusetts casting a vote has been Paul Kirk.
Former Massachusetts Senator Paul Kirk.
This is after numerous Democrat leaders claiming that Brown would be seated immediately, in accordance with Massachusetts state law.
Where is the outcry, not only from the citizens of the Bay State, but from the leadership of the GOP?
Calling Michael Steele.
Obama’s Answer For America Is: More Obama
January 28, 2010
President Obama must be a firm believer in the old saying “If at first you don’t succeed, try try again.”
I guess he never heard the one about what defines doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
There’s a story of an ex hausted tenor at La Scala who, facing repeated cries of “Encore,” responded that he couldn’t go on. A man rose in the audience to say, “You’ll keep singing until you get it right.”
That seems to be the defining principle of the Obama administration — whose response to every problem, every setback, every hiccup and challenge has been, simply, “more Obama.”
Indeed, for people who aren’t sticklers for political jargon, it will be a shock that last night was Obama’s first State of the Union Address, since it was his third formal address to a joint session of Congress. Yet for all of the political déjà vu, what was most surprising last night was the degree to which Obama delivered even more of the same.
Washington graybeards and pundits have been insisting that Obama needs to “start over,” “reboot” and “tack to the middle” after Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts. But Obama’s response last night was to recommit himself to the agenda that has gotten him in so much trouble.
In fairness, the president took a French-bath of Clintonism before he took to his beloved TelePrompTer. He doused himself with the scent of the deficit-fighter and trade-promoter. He unveiled a slew of small, easy, applause-gathering proposals and populist appeals that he knows will go nowhere.
He also indulged in a lot of feel-your-pain pathos, trying to connect with the real Americans suffering from the recession and the misdeeds of a “Washington” that Obama seems to think is run by someone other than him.
A New Declaration Of Independence
January 28, 2010
This time, it’s a Declaration Of Independence from Obamacare.
The only thing missing was quills and powdered wigs.
Eleven House conservatives on Wednesday signed a “Declaration of Health Care Independence” at an event staged by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), and there was no shortage of Revolutionary War rhetoric and tea party references.
Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) compared Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts last Tuesday to the battle of Lexington in April 1775. The congressmen signed their names at the bottom of the so-called declaration, which had been printed in a small font to mirror Thomas Jefferson’s calligraphy.
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) noted that the signers of the original Declaration of Independence put their lives and property at stake. The Republicans who signed Wednesday afternoon appeared to be in no grave political danger, since they all have fairly safe seats.
“Last week Massachusetts fired another shot that was heard round the world,” Akin said. “Each of those shots were followed by various declarations. … The shot has been fired now twice in Massachusetts, and this is a declaration.”
I’m Better At Math And Puzzles Than The President
January 26, 2010
I understand what numbers and statistics mean, and I can “connect the dots.”
It’s becoming obvious that President Obama can’t.
Forget any hope you may have had about President Obama reducing the size of the federal deficit.
I know, I know, many of you reading this place some (if not more than some) of the size of the deficit on the shoulders of the Democratic Party’s reckless spending, bailouts, etc.
Regardless of how is at fault for the ballooning amount of debt America is saddled with, one thing is clear.
There is no HOPE of President Obama bringing about any significant CHANGE.
The President will not reduce the deficit, nor will he cut spending, due to the fact that he cannot do the math when it comes to things that affect him on a personal level.
Cosider the following:
In 2008, Obama won in Massachusetts by 26 points.
In last week’s Senate race, Martha Coakley lost to Scott Brown by 5 points.
That’s a 31 point difference.
In 2008, Obama carried New Jersey by 16 points.
In the recent Governor’s race, the Democrat incumbent candidate lost by 4 points.
A 20 point difference.
In 2008, candidate Obama won in Virginia by 6 points.
In 2009, the Democrat candidate for Governor lost by 18 points.
Net loss, 24 points.
However you crunch the numbers, these results are a clear repudiation of President Obama and his agenda.
And the news gets worse.
According to the latest Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll, the data shows that 25% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -16.
All of this should be a cause for concern on the part of president Obama.
Yet his arrogance continues to lead him to believe that American’s will still drink the Kool-Aid, and that he and his fellow Democrats can continue to promote their Socialist agenda.
Sorry Mr. President, the numbers just don’t add up.
House Majority Leader Has A “Senior Moment”
January 25, 2010
I feel bad for him, but what other explanation could there be?
When asked to comment on the results of last week’s Senate race in Massachusetts, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer had this to say:
“I think what the public is angry about is they see, first of all, an opposition for opposition’s sake.”
He was of course alluding to the Democrats often-made claim that Republicans won’t support health care reform, or the rest of President Obama’s agenda, simply to be obstructionist.
And that the American public is mad at what Hoyer believes is “opposition for opposition’s sake.”
They sure have a strange way of showing it Steny.
They show that they are fed up with Republicans in general, and the Republican Party opposing health care “reform” by electing yet another republican to the Senate, one who made no secret of his opposition to passing Obamacare by signing his autograph with the number “41″.
As in 41 Republicans taking away your party’s supermajority.
And they elected number 41 in a state that hasn’t elected a Republican Senator in 42 years.
Oh yeah Congressman Hoyer, I can see where your coming from.
And I’ve got a pretty good guess as to where you and many of your fellow Democrats are going this November.
Recent Comments