Special to The Bold Pursuit ... Commonsense advice from Silence Dogood.
The Rules for Radicals dictate that your are to be targeted, marginalized, attacked, and eliminated as a threat. You will be attacked. Prepare to be called “backwards,” “stupid,” “dangerous,” “uneducated,” or worse. The best thing you can do is wear your best suit of armor: knowledge, faith, and dignity.
With knowledge, you can counterclaim and expose the fraudulent for who they are. Faith will give you strength and guidance to do so effectively. When you have dignity, you have credibility. Are your apathetic neighbors more likely to believe a claim from someone who is diligent, thoughtful in speech, and dignified, or a crazy mad radical screaming lunatic?
In your communications with others, reach out to those receptive. Avoid punching walls. When you happen upon someone closed to your message, you will not convert him or her—at least not overnight. Move on. Spend as little time possible with people who have their minds made up opposite as yours. You would be punching a wall. Walls don't move. Walls always win. It hurts to punch a wall. The longer you stay to punch the wall, the more damage the wall does to your dignity and credibility (the enemy angers you, gaining ammunition). Punching walls in plain dumb. Move on (no pun intended).
Likewise in your communications with others, don't spend a great deal of time reaching out to people who are already as motivated by the same core values as yourself. It is important to build relationships and networks for support. Exchanging ideas and organizing is equally important, however, don't overindulge in “shop talk” or “making fun off the crazy leftists” when that time can better be spend elsewhere. Again, move on (again, no pun intended).
Spend the majority of your valuable time with the apathetic, uninformed, and misinformed. We don't want to confuse these people as being “stupid” or “uneducated.” Think of them as politically inactive, busy people with families and friends who barely have time to take Mom to her doctor appointments and pick the kids up from baseball practice, much less watch six-hour debates on C-Span on Saturday night.
They know only what others tell them or what is slipped by them in 30 second news bits on television. Most don't know who Nancy Pelosi is, nor so they care. That is your job. Your job is to tell them who she is and why they should care. Do this in a helpful manner rather than a confrontational manner. You understand how busy they are. You simply hold a moral obligation to make their lives easier (if they so choose to allow your message) to present facts and allow them to take action on Election Day.
Showing posts with label pelosi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pelosi. Show all posts
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Thursday, April 8, 2010
My Observation on The News: Liberal V. Conservative ...
I grew up in a family that reads newspapers and watches the news. Every day, we received a morning and evening newspaper; the “Portland Journal” and “The Oregonian” (now, just “The Oregonian”).
My father awakens at 4:00 each weekday, as he has since I was a child, and spends an hour thoroughly reviewing and then neatly putting the paper back together in its original order. After he left for work, the rest of us took turns at the morning news over our bowls of cereal, but, admittedly, were not as fastidious about reassembling the newspaper. When I moved to California, after ordering electricity, telephone and gas, I subscribed to the “Los Angeles Times” – thus, beginning a new generation of household newspaper subscribers in our family.
A few years ago, I returned to Portland. During my first breakfast at home, I collected the neatly re-organized newspaper and began my daily read. A few pages into the front page section, I realized that I was no longer in liberal L.A., but in a place where conservative viewpoints were virtually verboten and could find scant evidence of balanced, unbiased journalism.
During the 2008 Obama campaign “The Oregonian” became so biased for Obama that I felt the word “advertisement” should appear on every news and Op-Ed page. Eventually, the only section of the “Obama-gonian,” as I now refer to it, I found to be accurate and unprejudiced was the television log.
(A few years ago, the paper’s only conservative commentator left and now there is no respectful disagreement or counterpoint to the often egregious errors or Obama favoritism.)
Obama-gonians and Bias
I’m certain that my hometown paper’s liberal bent is not unique, but decided to verify that observation. What I discovered corroborated my views:
According to the Media Research Center, the American Society of Newspaper Editors found that liberals outnumber conservatives by a four-to-one ratio; newspaper editors admit that 71% of reporters sometimes/often influence coverage and in 2008, 70% of Americans said journalists wanted Barack Obama to win the election.
Even more disturbing:
“Nearly nine out of ten Americans (89%) think reporters “often” or “sometimes” let their own political preferences influence the way they report the news” – Media Research Center
In the April 4, 2010 Sunday edition of “The Oregonian,” I glanced at the Op-Ed section. In the right-hand “Short Takes” column, there were a few gems that are representative of the daily Op-Ed features and letters to the editor:
Tempest in a Tea Party
Based on the iconic Boston Tea Party of 1733 when colonists rebelled against an oppressive government and taxation without representation, the Tea Partiers of today are often misrepresented by mainstream media, as noted by Mr. McIntyre, and portrayed as racist, homophobic and violent.
Of course, the media isn’t alone in its dark view of conservative protest: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the protestors are like Nazis and a senior aide circulated a document regarding their rallies: “…the tea parties are "not really all about average citizens," the document continues, saying neo-Nazis, militias, secessionists and racists are attending them.”
Obviously, the defamation of the conservative activist isn’t confined to a politically compromised media; it rains down from the highest levels in the Washington bureaucracy. Perhaps Washington liberals are in a panic as they observe the expanding crowds at rallies, the newly-vocal conservative dissenter at Town Hall meetings, the peaceful, but passionate troops at national and local marches. Certainly, there were people who acted inappropriately – one can find fringe elements or bad behavior in any large group. While that’s not an excuse, the truth is these incidents are the exception and not the norm.
Only one major news outlet is consistently friendly and fair to conservative issues: the much maligned by the left, Fox News Channel. Interestingly, Fox News Channel earned its highest ratings ever in the first quarter of 2010.
Fair and Balanced – and Killing the Liberal Competition
Fox News has ruled the cable news genre for years; CNN, formerly the “Most Trusted Name in News,” lost half its audience in the latest cable rankings. “Larry King Live” lost 43% of his audience and other CNN programs also saw a double-digit loss in viewership. MSNBC is in the cable news ratings basement:
Total Day: FNC – 1,105,000 viewers, CNN – 394,000 viewers, MSNBC – 369,000 viewers
Prime Time: FNC – 2,032,000 viewers, CNN – 503,000 viewers, MSNBC –680,000 viewers (Source: Nielsen, reported by TVByTheNumbers.com)
Granted, the Op-Ed “Short Takes” and Letters to the Editor are not written by the paper’s reporters, but by its readers. The examples quoted in this blog are not unique; the authors’ opinions are seemingly representative of the average Portland reader or at least, these are the letters and comments that The Obama-gonian deems fit to print.
My hometown has a strong liberal bias (a favorite bumper sticker: “Keep Portland Weird”), but is the bias perpetuated and supported by local media or is the media accurately reflecting the political mindset of the community? Since the reportage and reader input tilts far to the left and pollsters confirm that the media leans liberal offers a perplexing paradigm of politics and journalism.
This much is clear: the most conservative-friendly news outlet is the pre-eminent news source in America. Almost all of the national polling companies tell us that the media has a liberal bias and Americans believe they will use that bias to influence their reports. These same pollsters tell us that our current president’s approval ratings are steadily dropping, and faith in our Congressional leaders has faltered.
My liberal neighbors denounce “Faux News Channel” as a wing of the Republican Party and accuse the network of political partiality. However, the polls, as well as the emergence of multitudes of marchers, protestors and tea parties tell a different story.
I guess we’re just not on the same page … yet.
© The Bold Pursuit, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
My father awakens at 4:00 each weekday, as he has since I was a child, and spends an hour thoroughly reviewing and then neatly putting the paper back together in its original order. After he left for work, the rest of us took turns at the morning news over our bowls of cereal, but, admittedly, were not as fastidious about reassembling the newspaper. When I moved to California, after ordering electricity, telephone and gas, I subscribed to the “Los Angeles Times” – thus, beginning a new generation of household newspaper subscribers in our family.
A few years ago, I returned to Portland. During my first breakfast at home, I collected the neatly re-organized newspaper and began my daily read. A few pages into the front page section, I realized that I was no longer in liberal L.A., but in a place where conservative viewpoints were virtually verboten and could find scant evidence of balanced, unbiased journalism.
During the 2008 Obama campaign “The Oregonian” became so biased for Obama that I felt the word “advertisement” should appear on every news and Op-Ed page. Eventually, the only section of the “Obama-gonian,” as I now refer to it, I found to be accurate and unprejudiced was the television log.
(A few years ago, the paper’s only conservative commentator left and now there is no respectful disagreement or counterpoint to the often egregious errors or Obama favoritism.)
Obama-gonians and Bias
I’m certain that my hometown paper’s liberal bent is not unique, but decided to verify that observation. What I discovered corroborated my views:
According to the Media Research Center, the American Society of Newspaper Editors found that liberals outnumber conservatives by a four-to-one ratio; newspaper editors admit that 71% of reporters sometimes/often influence coverage and in 2008, 70% of Americans said journalists wanted Barack Obama to win the election.
Even more disturbing:
“Nearly nine out of ten Americans (89%) think reporters “often” or “sometimes” let their own political preferences influence the way they report the news” – Media Research Center
In the April 4, 2010 Sunday edition of “The Oregonian,” I glanced at the Op-Ed section. In the right-hand “Short Takes” column, there were a few gems that are representative of the daily Op-Ed features and letters to the editor:
“Tea parties and militias: When being Republican just isn’t narrow-minded enough.” Randy Bynum, Southwest Portland
“Would it not be a welcoming change if the tea partiers focused their attention on out-of-control federal spending, insufficient taxation [your eyes did not deceive you, this contributor wrote “insufficient taxation”] and needed banking reforms instead of racial hatred, homophobia and acts of violence?” Gene H. McIntyre, Keizer, OR.FYI, Gene: this is the (generally accepted) tea party movement platform: “fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, less government, states' rights and national security.” Source: Fox News. Yes, Fox News – get over it.
Tempest in a Tea Party
Based on the iconic Boston Tea Party of 1733 when colonists rebelled against an oppressive government and taxation without representation, the Tea Partiers of today are often misrepresented by mainstream media, as noted by Mr. McIntyre, and portrayed as racist, homophobic and violent.
Of course, the media isn’t alone in its dark view of conservative protest: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the protestors are like Nazis and a senior aide circulated a document regarding their rallies: “…the tea parties are "not really all about average citizens," the document continues, saying neo-Nazis, militias, secessionists and racists are attending them.”
Obviously, the defamation of the conservative activist isn’t confined to a politically compromised media; it rains down from the highest levels in the Washington bureaucracy. Perhaps Washington liberals are in a panic as they observe the expanding crowds at rallies, the newly-vocal conservative dissenter at Town Hall meetings, the peaceful, but passionate troops at national and local marches. Certainly, there were people who acted inappropriately – one can find fringe elements or bad behavior in any large group. While that’s not an excuse, the truth is these incidents are the exception and not the norm.
Only one major news outlet is consistently friendly and fair to conservative issues: the much maligned by the left, Fox News Channel. Interestingly, Fox News Channel earned its highest ratings ever in the first quarter of 2010.
Fair and Balanced – and Killing the Liberal Competition
Fox News has ruled the cable news genre for years; CNN, formerly the “Most Trusted Name in News,” lost half its audience in the latest cable rankings. “Larry King Live” lost 43% of his audience and other CNN programs also saw a double-digit loss in viewership. MSNBC is in the cable news ratings basement:
Total Day: FNC – 1,105,000 viewers, CNN – 394,000 viewers, MSNBC – 369,000 viewers
Prime Time: FNC – 2,032,000 viewers, CNN – 503,000 viewers, MSNBC –680,000 viewers (Source: Nielsen, reported by TVByTheNumbers.com)
Granted, the Op-Ed “Short Takes” and Letters to the Editor are not written by the paper’s reporters, but by its readers. The examples quoted in this blog are not unique; the authors’ opinions are seemingly representative of the average Portland reader or at least, these are the letters and comments that The Obama-gonian deems fit to print.
My hometown has a strong liberal bias (a favorite bumper sticker: “Keep Portland Weird”), but is the bias perpetuated and supported by local media or is the media accurately reflecting the political mindset of the community? Since the reportage and reader input tilts far to the left and pollsters confirm that the media leans liberal offers a perplexing paradigm of politics and journalism.
This much is clear: the most conservative-friendly news outlet is the pre-eminent news source in America. Almost all of the national polling companies tell us that the media has a liberal bias and Americans believe they will use that bias to influence their reports. These same pollsters tell us that our current president’s approval ratings are steadily dropping, and faith in our Congressional leaders has faltered.
My liberal neighbors denounce “Faux News Channel” as a wing of the Republican Party and accuse the network of political partiality. However, the polls, as well as the emergence of multitudes of marchers, protestors and tea parties tell a different story.
I guess we’re just not on the same page … yet.
© The Bold Pursuit, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Sunday, March 21, 2010
“A Tale of Two, Three or 30 Congressmen – the Stupak Buy-Out”
UPDATE: March 21, 2010
I knew (and dreaded the possibility) that I would need to amend or update my blog, “A Tale of Two Congressmen,” and, after watching Rep. Bart Stupak announce in a news conference his decision to change his vote to a “Yes” for ObamaCare despite months of firm, decisive claims to the contrary, I need to clarify and retract portions of that article.
Rep. Stupak just changed his “No” vote to a “Yes” for ObamaCare, based on a last minute promise by Mr. Obama to write an Executive Order prohibiting federal funds for abortion, with exceptions for rape, incest or to protect the health of the mother.
In fairness, I can’t brand Rep. Stupak as another crooked politician; he didn’t specifically deviate from his position on abortion or his desire for health care reform. Stupak was clear that he would support HR 3590 if it did not include federal funds for abortion.
While the bill may be considered amended by the Executive Order, it is my understanding that Mr. Obama has the latitude to retract an Executive Order, as will subsequent presidents. If that is the case (I’ve read the EO, but need more information before taking a definitive position), then the rights of the unborn are still in peril.
“A Tale of Two Congressmen,” compares the ethics of Stupak and Rep. Dennis Kucinich. While an Executive Order is in a different “perk” category than plane rides on Air Force One or promises of party and financial support (according to news reports), Stupak’s decision puts him, from my perspective, in a gray area. Yes, the congressman, more or less, kept his word; however, as I comprehend this development, the provision in the Senate bill wasn’t changed; it is negated by the Executive Order.
Stupak, like many of his colleagues, negotiated a deal with Mr. Obama – welcome to the club, Congressman! You may know some of the members: Flyboy Kucinich, Louisiana Purchase Landrieu, as well your cohorts from Tennessee, North Dakota, Oregon, Arizona, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin, Montana and the District of Columbia. (Sources: NPR, Fox News)
As pro-ObamaCare Democrats stand around and congratulate themselves over their “victory,” more than half of Americans (according to a number of polls) fiercely reject this bill and the sneaky, bamboozling of our political system.
Mr. Obama, Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi know that Americans are angry over the abuse of Reconciliation, Deem and Pass and other, usually legitimate, political actions taken to coerce this bill into law, so why aren’t they listening to their constituents?
According to today’s Rasmussen Reports polls, 42% of Americans strongly disapprove of Obama’s performance as Presidential, giving him an Approval Index rating of -16. Also determined by Rasmussen, “50% of voters are less likely to vote for a Member of Congress who supports the health care reform plan proposed by the President and Congressional Democrats. Just 20% believe that most Members of Congress will understand the proposed health care bill before they vote on it.”
Furthermore, Real Clear Politics polls indicate that 75.8% of Americans disapprove of Congressional job performance and over 60% of the country believes that America is headed in the wrong direction. Is anyone in Washington, on the “Left” side of the aisle, listening? We know that Obama’s Oval Office is sound-proofed with arrogance and an iron will to get “his” bill passed today.
Yesterday, a small group angry citizens hurled racial epithets and homophobic slurs at a few elected Democrats. The Bold Pursuit strongly denounces those actions.
However, we support the majority of angry, fuming Americans who feel betrayed by the way our system is being manipulated so that Obama, Pelosi and Reid can have their “win.”
Today, they may revel in having the votes needed to cram through unwanted legislation that is predicted to inflict profoundly negative and fundamental change in our country, but next November the gloating will turn to gloom as the results of the Democratic “eviction” campaigns send an unequivocal message to Washington: “you should have listened to the People and Killed the Bill.”
I knew (and dreaded the possibility) that I would need to amend or update my blog, “A Tale of Two Congressmen,” and, after watching Rep. Bart Stupak announce in a news conference his decision to change his vote to a “Yes” for ObamaCare despite months of firm, decisive claims to the contrary, I need to clarify and retract portions of that article.
Rep. Stupak just changed his “No” vote to a “Yes” for ObamaCare, based on a last minute promise by Mr. Obama to write an Executive Order prohibiting federal funds for abortion, with exceptions for rape, incest or to protect the health of the mother.
In fairness, I can’t brand Rep. Stupak as another crooked politician; he didn’t specifically deviate from his position on abortion or his desire for health care reform. Stupak was clear that he would support HR 3590 if it did not include federal funds for abortion.
While the bill may be considered amended by the Executive Order, it is my understanding that Mr. Obama has the latitude to retract an Executive Order, as will subsequent presidents. If that is the case (I’ve read the EO, but need more information before taking a definitive position), then the rights of the unborn are still in peril.
“A Tale of Two Congressmen,” compares the ethics of Stupak and Rep. Dennis Kucinich. While an Executive Order is in a different “perk” category than plane rides on Air Force One or promises of party and financial support (according to news reports), Stupak’s decision puts him, from my perspective, in a gray area. Yes, the congressman, more or less, kept his word; however, as I comprehend this development, the provision in the Senate bill wasn’t changed; it is negated by the Executive Order.
Stupak, like many of his colleagues, negotiated a deal with Mr. Obama – welcome to the club, Congressman! You may know some of the members: Flyboy Kucinich, Louisiana Purchase Landrieu, as well your cohorts from Tennessee, North Dakota, Oregon, Arizona, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin, Montana and the District of Columbia. (Sources: NPR, Fox News)
As pro-ObamaCare Democrats stand around and congratulate themselves over their “victory,” more than half of Americans (according to a number of polls) fiercely reject this bill and the sneaky, bamboozling of our political system.
Mr. Obama, Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi know that Americans are angry over the abuse of Reconciliation, Deem and Pass and other, usually legitimate, political actions taken to coerce this bill into law, so why aren’t they listening to their constituents?
According to today’s Rasmussen Reports polls, 42% of Americans strongly disapprove of Obama’s performance as Presidential, giving him an Approval Index rating of -16. Also determined by Rasmussen, “50% of voters are less likely to vote for a Member of Congress who supports the health care reform plan proposed by the President and Congressional Democrats. Just 20% believe that most Members of Congress will understand the proposed health care bill before they vote on it.”
Furthermore, Real Clear Politics polls indicate that 75.8% of Americans disapprove of Congressional job performance and over 60% of the country believes that America is headed in the wrong direction. Is anyone in Washington, on the “Left” side of the aisle, listening? We know that Obama’s Oval Office is sound-proofed with arrogance and an iron will to get “his” bill passed today.
Yesterday, a small group angry citizens hurled racial epithets and homophobic slurs at a few elected Democrats. The Bold Pursuit strongly denounces those actions.
However, we support the majority of angry, fuming Americans who feel betrayed by the way our system is being manipulated so that Obama, Pelosi and Reid can have their “win.”
Today, they may revel in having the votes needed to cram through unwanted legislation that is predicted to inflict profoundly negative and fundamental change in our country, but next November the gloating will turn to gloom as the results of the Democratic “eviction” campaigns send an unequivocal message to Washington: “you should have listened to the People and Killed the Bill.”
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Memo to Mr. Obama: Time to Read the Tea Leaves…
by Clio
In an act as symbolic as the Boston Tea Party in December 1773, Massachusetts voters went to the polls in record numbers to send Washington a clear and unambiguous message by electing Republican Scott Brown over Democrat Martha Coakley to fill the late Senator Ted Kennedy’s seat in the United States Senate.
Brown is the first Republican since the 1970s to be elected to the U.S. Senate by Massachusetts voters.
Senator-Elect Brown campaigned on a platform that objects to the Obama administration’s haste and waste method of government. He opposes big government, the immensely unpopular healthcare plan and the egregious 13-trillion dollar national debt incurred by Mr. Obama’s policies.
Tonight’s election results are, in effect, a priority memo to Washington: it’s time to read the “tea leaves.”
The unusually high number of voters tonight is indicative of scenarios that will, predictably, be played out across the country in the coming months and years: voters flocking to the polls to the express their outrage at Mr. Obama’s aggressive and tax-heavy agendas, including the much-repudiated healthcare legislation, Senate and Congressional bribery (for example, Landrieu’s “Louisiana Purchase” and Nelson’s Nebraska “Cornhusker Kickback”) and his full back-track on campaign promises.
Accountability is the new keyword for American voters. We’re searching for it and we will have it. Lawmakers who prefer to follow the ill-conceived agendas and legislation of Mr. Obama’s government, in defiance of their constituents’ desires and best interests, may find themselves unemployed in the near future.
In 2008, a slight majority of Americans voted for Mr. Obama, based on his lofty campaign promises of hope and change. It is almost exactly one year after his inauguration and we have witnessed change in our country: sloppy, hasty, poorly-conceived and executed changes, i.e., the Guantanamo Bay closure and plans to try terrorists in civil trials in New York courthouses.
Change, yes, but not the “change we need.” It’s the kind of change that Mr. Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (who is currently lagging in his re-election polls in Nevada) want to cram down our national gullet by any means possible.
We can only hope that, in the upcoming races, the electorate will send a message to Obama, Pelosi and Reid as easy to decipher as history’s Boston Tea Party and Senator-Elect Scott Brown’s victory tonight in Massachusetts: America doesn’t want your healthcare plan and exorbitant taxes.
We do not want big government, 13 trillion-dollar debts or ineffective bailout plans. We do want you and the party in power (Democrats) to listen: for most of the past year, Americans have stood up in Town Hall meetings and strongly expressed their concerns regarding Medicare cuts, fundamentally-flawed healthcare legislation and other bills that were forced through the House and Senate, often without allowing our representatives time to read the hefty, 1000-plus page documents.
In recent months, Americans took to the streets to march in peaceful protests, rallies and tea parties across our nation. Mr. Obama, Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi – you didn’t listen. You maligned and ignored the people you govern.
Now, America is heading to the polls with a message you can’t ignore: “Good Bye.”
© The Bold Pursuit, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
In an act as symbolic as the Boston Tea Party in December 1773, Massachusetts voters went to the polls in record numbers to send Washington a clear and unambiguous message by electing Republican Scott Brown over Democrat Martha Coakley to fill the late Senator Ted Kennedy’s seat in the United States Senate.
Brown is the first Republican since the 1970s to be elected to the U.S. Senate by Massachusetts voters.
Senator-Elect Brown campaigned on a platform that objects to the Obama administration’s haste and waste method of government. He opposes big government, the immensely unpopular healthcare plan and the egregious 13-trillion dollar national debt incurred by Mr. Obama’s policies.
Tonight’s election results are, in effect, a priority memo to Washington: it’s time to read the “tea leaves.”
The unusually high number of voters tonight is indicative of scenarios that will, predictably, be played out across the country in the coming months and years: voters flocking to the polls to the express their outrage at Mr. Obama’s aggressive and tax-heavy agendas, including the much-repudiated healthcare legislation, Senate and Congressional bribery (for example, Landrieu’s “Louisiana Purchase” and Nelson’s Nebraska “Cornhusker Kickback”) and his full back-track on campaign promises.
Accountability is the new keyword for American voters. We’re searching for it and we will have it. Lawmakers who prefer to follow the ill-conceived agendas and legislation of Mr. Obama’s government, in defiance of their constituents’ desires and best interests, may find themselves unemployed in the near future.
In 2008, a slight majority of Americans voted for Mr. Obama, based on his lofty campaign promises of hope and change. It is almost exactly one year after his inauguration and we have witnessed change in our country: sloppy, hasty, poorly-conceived and executed changes, i.e., the Guantanamo Bay closure and plans to try terrorists in civil trials in New York courthouses.
Change, yes, but not the “change we need.” It’s the kind of change that Mr. Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (who is currently lagging in his re-election polls in Nevada) want to cram down our national gullet by any means possible.
We can only hope that, in the upcoming races, the electorate will send a message to Obama, Pelosi and Reid as easy to decipher as history’s Boston Tea Party and Senator-Elect Scott Brown’s victory tonight in Massachusetts: America doesn’t want your healthcare plan and exorbitant taxes.
We do not want big government, 13 trillion-dollar debts or ineffective bailout plans. We do want you and the party in power (Democrats) to listen: for most of the past year, Americans have stood up in Town Hall meetings and strongly expressed their concerns regarding Medicare cuts, fundamentally-flawed healthcare legislation and other bills that were forced through the House and Senate, often without allowing our representatives time to read the hefty, 1000-plus page documents.
In recent months, Americans took to the streets to march in peaceful protests, rallies and tea parties across our nation. Mr. Obama, Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi – you didn’t listen. You maligned and ignored the people you govern.
Now, America is heading to the polls with a message you can’t ignore: “Good Bye.”
© The Bold Pursuit, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Thursday, December 24, 2009
“It’s beginning to look a lot like … Chicago-style politics in Washington, D.C.”
By Clio
The Bold Pursuit wishes everyone a Joyous Christmas and Happy Chanukah. It is our hope that, like Mr. Obama, Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi, you will find your most desired gifts, wrapped in festive paper and adorned with bright ribbons under your trees. Of course, we also hope that you didn’t ask Santa for a horror of a health care plan that will burden your nation with taxes or raise the debt ceiling a few hundred billion dollars…
We found this quote from an article by Martha R. Gore on Suite101.com (full attribution and permission links below). This paragraph seems very apropos considering the man who occupies the Oval Office learned what he knows of politics from a grand city, one our favorite places, albeit one of the most politically corrupt towns in our country:
According to the Fox News commentator (and I paraphrase), Sen. Bill Nelson’s “sweetheart deal” (NE) or Sen. Mary Landrieu’s (LA) multi-million dollar grab bag, just to name a few of the political profiteers, in any other context would be called bribery; however, in Washington, D.C. this is simply “horse-trading.”
I will refrain from expressing myself on this point, except to say that the first word of my opinion begins with “horse.”
Mr. Obama learned and earned his political stripes in a city that, one could argue, is synonymous with political corruption. Forget former Governor Rod Blagojevich's wiretaps, Obama and Blago chum, Tony Rezko’s convictions for fraud and money-laundering, or infamous Chicago “boss” Mayor Richard Daley tainted reign of Chi-Town; Chicago’s colorful and crooked political history is so rife with generational lawlessness that it is, by some, considered the norm. Of course, Al Capone, who was born in Brooklyn, New York, earned his reputation as one of America’s most infamous early gangsters in Chicago.
Honestly, I really don’t care about presenting Mr. Obama with a “win” in order to shore up his weak and ill-defined (but frenetically aggressive) agendas. Mr. Obama was elected to govern the American people and act in their best interests – not indulge his own narcissistic needs. Americans have clearly, loudly and emphatically expressed their disapproval of the federal government taking over health care, as well as the broader ramifications that will accompany acquisition of approximately one-sixth of our economy.
The protests heard in town hall meetings, marches, tea party events, letters and phone calls to elected officials fell on deaf and uncaring ears: the bill was passed, 60 – 39, and now goes to conference in which the committee will attempt to merge or reconcile the Congressional and Senate bills.
As we contemplate this next step, it is fair to ask “Are there problems with the current state of health care in America? Do we need new legislation?” Yes. I know this firsthand as an independent, small business owner.
Many years ago, I was diagnosed with a serious illness just nine months after obtaining an individual health policy. My first claims for diagnostic tests and treatment were denied. I didn’t politely accept the denial; I fired off angry letters and rattled every cage I could find. My claims were, in short order, accepted. I am the proverbial squeaky wheel and know how to throw a first-class, window-rattling, indignant fit in order to get past patronizing gatekeepers.
Health care providers: A friend of mine owns an insurance agency. Every year, the premiums increase at rates that range from 20-35%. My friend must pass on these increases to his clients and many opt to drop certain benefits, change providers or drop coverage for all employees – they simply can’t afford the egregious premiums.
Portability: when I moved from one state to another, I was not allowed to keep my private policy. Since I had a pre-existing condition, the possibility of obtaining an affordable individual policy was unlikely.
“Big Pharma”: my first policy did not, initially, include a pharmacy plan. My out-of-pocket costs for medicine were exorbitant – even in 1992. Years later, when my employer went out of business and all of us lost our medical coverage, I tried to purchase medication and was stunned when charged hundreds of dollars for one month’s supply of medicine.
Tort reform, keeping insurance providers and the pharmaceutical industries in check without restricting free trade, offering portability, as well as affordable plans for the self- or unemployed are a few positive steps that could salvage a premier health care industry. With a few carefully considered legislative acts, we could help keep costs in check, expand coverage availability without burdening Americans with more taxes and prevent chasing away qualified medical personnel who will seek employment elsewhere in order to be able to support their families, pay onerous malpractice insurance and repay their expensive student loans. Medical professionals may even opt to choose another profession.
Of course, all of the above has been suggested by president after president to uncooperative, partisan representatives.
Mr. Obama claims that seven presidents before him tried to enact health care reform … and failed. Why did they fail, Mr. Obama? President Clinton also wanted socialized medicine for America, but America didn’t want ClintonCare.
President George W. Bush pushed for tort reform, portability, health care spending accounts and, facing an uncooperative House and Senate, was unable to pass his legislation.
Mr. Obama will claim his “win” through bribery and deceitful practices, learned from his friends and neighbors in the sullied style of the Chicago political machine. In my opinion, that’s not a win or a victory to trumpet –it’s a buyout.
This country does need health care reform – there is no question on that point. However, we should try to pass health care reform that Americans want and need, not pass out political payouts.
Mr. Obama, find your ego-stroking, big-ticket win by governing this country with integrity and hard work. We know you are inexperienced in Washington politics, having served approximately 150 days in the Senate prior to your election, but no one gets to make excuses in the Oval Office. Isn’t it time, Mr. Obama, that you stopped whining and finger-pointing at the Bush Administration and started acting like a true leader? How does one define that? Consider the following:
Mr. Obama, Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats in the Senate and House: Back room deals and vote manipulation may foist an unwanted partisan plan on our country, but this “win” may very well become a loss when voters go to the polls in upcoming elections. America will let you know what it thinks of your sweetheart deals, bribery and corruption. Your holiday gift may turn into an “unclean” lump of unburnable coal.
Merry Christmas, America!
1 Permission to quote granted by author, Martha R. Gore, M.L.S.Read more at Suite101: Corruption in American Cities: Chicago: From the Great Fire of 1871 to the 21st Century, Corruption Thrives | Suite101.com http://americanaffairs.suite101.com/article.cfm/corruption_in_amerian_cities_chicago#ixzz0aNU01hOe
© The Bold Pursuit, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
The Bold Pursuit wishes everyone a Joyous Christmas and Happy Chanukah. It is our hope that, like Mr. Obama, Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi, you will find your most desired gifts, wrapped in festive paper and adorned with bright ribbons under your trees. Of course, we also hope that you didn’t ask Santa for a horror of a health care plan that will burden your nation with taxes or raise the debt ceiling a few hundred billion dollars…
We found this quote from an article by Martha R. Gore on Suite101.com (full attribution and permission links below). This paragraph seems very apropos considering the man who occupies the Oval Office learned what he knows of politics from a grand city, one our favorite places, albeit one of the most politically corrupt towns in our country:
“Political corruption in Chicago in 1910s and 1920s flourished as organized crime stepped into the mix with payoffs to policemen. It continued under the leadership of Mayor Anton Cermack and then the Kelly-Nash machine that doled out patronage jobs, political appointments, and broad favors to ethnic groups. They kept the city solvent during the New Deal years by obtaining federal funds as well as resources from organized crime…” 1 (Italics added for emphasis by Clio.)Does the above have a familiar ring? Trading funds for favors? As noted by a recent guest on Fox News, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s bribes bought enough votes in order to cram through a health care bill that was not thoroughly vetted or debated (the cloture vote last weekend brought that option to a screeching halt), not to mention a bill that the majority of Americans, according to almost every major pollster, do not want. However, the Democrats want to hand Mr. Obama a “win” before Christmas – regardless of the desires or best interests of their constituents. The vote this morning tied a big RED ribbon on this lump of coal. Happy Holidays, Mr. Obama!
According to the Fox News commentator (and I paraphrase), Sen. Bill Nelson’s “sweetheart deal” (NE) or Sen. Mary Landrieu’s (LA) multi-million dollar grab bag, just to name a few of the political profiteers, in any other context would be called bribery; however, in Washington, D.C. this is simply “horse-trading.”
I will refrain from expressing myself on this point, except to say that the first word of my opinion begins with “horse.”
Mr. Obama learned and earned his political stripes in a city that, one could argue, is synonymous with political corruption. Forget former Governor Rod Blagojevich's wiretaps, Obama and Blago chum, Tony Rezko’s convictions for fraud and money-laundering, or infamous Chicago “boss” Mayor Richard Daley tainted reign of Chi-Town; Chicago’s colorful and crooked political history is so rife with generational lawlessness that it is, by some, considered the norm. Of course, Al Capone, who was born in Brooklyn, New York, earned his reputation as one of America’s most infamous early gangsters in Chicago.
“This source of corruption, alas, is inherent in the democratic system itself, and it can only be controlled, if at all, by finding ways to encourage legislators to subordinate ambition to principle.” James L. Buckley
Honestly, I really don’t care about presenting Mr. Obama with a “win” in order to shore up his weak and ill-defined (but frenetically aggressive) agendas. Mr. Obama was elected to govern the American people and act in their best interests – not indulge his own narcissistic needs. Americans have clearly, loudly and emphatically expressed their disapproval of the federal government taking over health care, as well as the broader ramifications that will accompany acquisition of approximately one-sixth of our economy.
The protests heard in town hall meetings, marches, tea party events, letters and phone calls to elected officials fell on deaf and uncaring ears: the bill was passed, 60 – 39, and now goes to conference in which the committee will attempt to merge or reconcile the Congressional and Senate bills.
As we contemplate this next step, it is fair to ask “Are there problems with the current state of health care in America? Do we need new legislation?” Yes. I know this firsthand as an independent, small business owner.
Many years ago, I was diagnosed with a serious illness just nine months after obtaining an individual health policy. My first claims for diagnostic tests and treatment were denied. I didn’t politely accept the denial; I fired off angry letters and rattled every cage I could find. My claims were, in short order, accepted. I am the proverbial squeaky wheel and know how to throw a first-class, window-rattling, indignant fit in order to get past patronizing gatekeepers.
Health care providers: A friend of mine owns an insurance agency. Every year, the premiums increase at rates that range from 20-35%. My friend must pass on these increases to his clients and many opt to drop certain benefits, change providers or drop coverage for all employees – they simply can’t afford the egregious premiums.
Portability: when I moved from one state to another, I was not allowed to keep my private policy. Since I had a pre-existing condition, the possibility of obtaining an affordable individual policy was unlikely.
“Big Pharma”: my first policy did not, initially, include a pharmacy plan. My out-of-pocket costs for medicine were exorbitant – even in 1992. Years later, when my employer went out of business and all of us lost our medical coverage, I tried to purchase medication and was stunned when charged hundreds of dollars for one month’s supply of medicine.
Tort reform, keeping insurance providers and the pharmaceutical industries in check without restricting free trade, offering portability, as well as affordable plans for the self- or unemployed are a few positive steps that could salvage a premier health care industry. With a few carefully considered legislative acts, we could help keep costs in check, expand coverage availability without burdening Americans with more taxes and prevent chasing away qualified medical personnel who will seek employment elsewhere in order to be able to support their families, pay onerous malpractice insurance and repay their expensive student loans. Medical professionals may even opt to choose another profession.
Of course, all of the above has been suggested by president after president to uncooperative, partisan representatives.
Mr. Obama claims that seven presidents before him tried to enact health care reform … and failed. Why did they fail, Mr. Obama? President Clinton also wanted socialized medicine for America, but America didn’t want ClintonCare.
President George W. Bush pushed for tort reform, portability, health care spending accounts and, facing an uncooperative House and Senate, was unable to pass his legislation.
Mr. Obama will claim his “win” through bribery and deceitful practices, learned from his friends and neighbors in the sullied style of the Chicago political machine. In my opinion, that’s not a win or a victory to trumpet –it’s a buyout.
This country does need health care reform – there is no question on that point. However, we should try to pass health care reform that Americans want and need, not pass out political payouts.
Mr. Obama, find your ego-stroking, big-ticket win by governing this country with integrity and hard work. We know you are inexperienced in Washington politics, having served approximately 150 days in the Senate prior to your election, but no one gets to make excuses in the Oval Office. Isn’t it time, Mr. Obama, that you stopped whining and finger-pointing at the Bush Administration and started acting like a true leader? How does one define that? Consider the following:
“The supreme quality for leadership is unquestionably integrity. Without it, no real success is possible, no matter whether it is on a section gang, a football field, in an army, or in an office.”
Dwight D. Eisenhower
“Character matters; leadership descends from character.” Rush Limbaugh
“Leadership is a potent combination of strategy and character. But if you must be without one, be without the strategy.”
Norman Schwarzkopf
“Leadership has a harder job to do than just choose sides. It must bring sides together.” Jesse Jackson
Mr. Obama, Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats in the Senate and House: Back room deals and vote manipulation may foist an unwanted partisan plan on our country, but this “win” may very well become a loss when voters go to the polls in upcoming elections. America will let you know what it thinks of your sweetheart deals, bribery and corruption. Your holiday gift may turn into an “unclean” lump of unburnable coal.
Merry Christmas, America!
1 Permission to quote granted by author, Martha R. Gore, M.L.S.Read more at Suite101: Corruption in American Cities: Chicago: From the Great Fire of 1871 to the 21st Century, Corruption Thrives | Suite101.com http://americanaffairs.suite101.com/article.cfm/corruption_in_amerian_cities_chicago#ixzz0aNU01hOe
© The Bold Pursuit, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)