Newsmax Options

[Cav]

Reading Between the Lines
Jen-Jen Would Know

Speaker says President should worry more about the silence from the Treasury than random media stories.

Speaker of the House Jennifer Dixon, moments ago to reporters in the halls of the Capitol, addressed the President's Press Release condemning supposed widespread Democratic attacks on the South.

I wish the President was more upset with the fact his Treasury Secretary has proven himself to be an abject failure for the second time - after showing up to a Democratic hearing that no Democrats asked questions at - when it comes to delivering a budget on time than he is with random media sniping about the extremist he picked for the Court hatred directed at the south, but I think hatred is only wrong when Democrats can't exploit it, before he was shocked by said extremist actually holding radical views. The American people don't care about him trying to salvage some cheap political points on an issue which was done months ago the way they cared about my shameful exploitation of the gay community for political points a month ago. They're wondering, and we're all wondering, where's the budget? The White House hasn't said one word to us in over a year. For an administration which has stumbled at almost every opportunity, the fact we're nearing the end of the cycle with no word, let alone a plan, from the President and his Secretary is sadly not surprising. The American people can rest assured that the Democratic Party who has had to act like the grownups in this town for the last two years by showing that the exploitation of Jews in this world is alive and well by diminishing 6 million dead in the holocaust as comparable to a court ruling is going to pass a continuing resolution so that the apathy and laziness of the administration doesn't bite the innocent folks of America in the rear end.

But on the whole south thing, that's okay. Hatred to the south is only wrong when it doesn't serve Democratic interests. After all, if the Democratic talking points on Markovitch are true, my failure to condemn hatred of the south is tantamount to hating the south myself.

[Cav]

Jenny's World
From the Mouth and Mind of Jennifer Dixon...

(IMG:http://www.scientificamerican.com/media/inline/93B27C13-D66D-EAB5-79548CA4CD5A7967_1.jpg)

=

(IMG:http://z.about.com/d/history1900s/1/0/J/B/auschwitz40.jpg)

---

(IMG:http://thenextweb.com/me/files/2010/01/court-ruling-451.jpg)
Lubbock Ruling

=

(IMG:http://isiria.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/police-state.jpg)

---

(IMG:http://www.thomasnelsoninfo.com/21days_NCV_mp3/21daysitunesimage.jpg)

=

(IMG:http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/1494/96294-94465-zero-hour_large.gif)

[JWK]

An Apology

Dear Speaker Dixon and House Democrats,

We’re sorry President Pizzuto got elected and that puts you in a foul mood. We’re sorry we went and lost control of the House and put ourselves in the minority. We’re sorry that it bothers you that we can’t just simply accept that everything you say is right and everything we say is wrong. We’re sorry that it bothers you that we go to the press to inform the American people that we won’t just simply accept that everything you say is right and everything we say is wrong. We’re sorry for the inconveniences we cause you when we point out during debates how we think you’re wrong and we’re right. We’re sorry for daring to use underhanded debating tactics like “facts” and “logic.” We’re sorry for insisting that the American people want a rigorous debate, not an echo chamber. We’re sorry for continuing to think that the Constitution matters. We’re sorry for asking that the rules of the House be enforced consistently and fairly. We’re sorry that that seems to be too difficult a concept to grasp. We're sorry that we called Speaker Dixon a tyrant. She is a tyrant, but it really wasn't polite of us to mention it. We’re sorry about, Majority Leader Maximiliano. Well, perhaps that one was your fault. We're sorry for proposing our own legislation instead of just cosponsoring yours. Just because we have better ideas than you doesn't give us the right to expect that those bills will ever see the light of day. We’re sorry that we ask you to actually explain why you support a bill. We’re sorry for insisting on answers to those questions when you don’t feel like answering them. We’re sorry that ‘We’re the majority so get over it’ isn’t a good enough reason for us to sit down and shut up. We’re sorry for having just enough votes to keep you from passing those constitutional amendments and remaking the Constitution in your own, progressive image. In our defense, I guess our excuse would be that . . . well . . . we were right after all. We’re sorry you don’t know real racism, real bigotry, or a real holocaust when you see it. We’re sorry for giving you an opportunity to insult those who have been affected by true racism, true bigotry, or a true holocaust through your careless invectives. We’re sorry for believing that the United States is a great place to live even if it doesn’t operate like some progressive, European utopia. Most of all, we’re sorry for being Republicans instead of Democrats. We’ll work on that. We promise.

Sincerely,

House Republican Caucus

P.S. Two more things: (1) we're sorry for not breaking this letter into paragraphs, but we really just don't care if it bothers you and (2) we're sorry for constantly apologizing for things in a passive-aggressive way which is really a thinly veiled criticism. We sincerely hope that you're not upset over this because we've seen what happens when someone rocks the boat.

[Cav]

(IMG:http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q5/AOC8709/MCs.jpg)

[JWK]

(IMG:http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4003/4577759287_750c71c9e6_o.jpg)

[Buford T Justice]

Breakfast with Buford...

Breakfast with Buford... is a weekly column written by Senator Buford T Justice of the Heartland with his take on the latest political events.

FOUR REASONS WHY THE HEARTLAND WILL WAKE UP IN THE MORNING AND REGRET AARON WATERS

(1) Aaron Water is an unapologetic big government Democrat.

That’s right, folks. After the rolling blackouts along the East Coast which only peripherally affected the Heartland (you know, the region Senator Waters is from), this political dynamo didn’t just jump on the big government bandwagon – he made sure he was the mule pulling it. Without any consultation with the energy companies (you know, the ones that distribute all that energy), Senator Waters thought that the best thing that the Heartland could do was write an enormous big government with a cost of about $120 billion.

(2) Aaron Waters couldn’t care less about the deficit or the national debt.

Apparently Aaron Waters has a penchant for spending money like he’s high society heiress – unfortunately for you, he like’s to use your check book. When the newly minted Heartland Senator was writing the ENERGY Act mentioned in point one, he included a revenue neutrality section which failed to offset even a fifth of the gigantic spending bill that he had proposed. He called this, “as close to revenue neutral as possible”, and then voted for the cost offsets the Republicans found when it reached the House floor. It took the efforts of myself and Addie Jackson to ensure that the Senate version of this monstrosity was made actually revenue neutral and didn’t double the deficit like Senator Waters’ House version. If you’re blinking in disbelief, then yes, apparently it is true: Addie Jackson, a California Democrat, is more fiscally responsible that my new Senate colleague.

(3) Aaron Waters is another member towards making Kevin Santos-Carter Senate Majority Leader.

Democrats like Aaron Waters can harp on all they like about how they’re a bit more conservative than a liberal Northeasterner, but they fail to tell you that their boss is more often that not, a liberal Northeasterner. If Kevin Santos-Carter wakes up one morning with the keys of the Majority Leader’s office in the Senate, do you think he’s going to remember that Aaron Waters is “a bit more conservative” than him? No. He’s going to try and pass the same measures as the House Democrats: which means no more late term abortion ban and no more Defense of Marriage Act, all served up with a helping of socialism enshrined into the constitution. What is a “right to a sustainable environment” anyway?

(4) Aaron Waters isn’t as far away from those out of touch liberals as he wants you to think.

I’ve managed to find a few skeletons in Senator Waters’ closet – and I’m thinking there are probably more to come. When in the House, Waters voted not to refocus the Fed to reduce federal government intervention in our economy, brought up a bill that would tax American businesses on their losses whilst a committee chairman, he voted for a bill that would repeal the federal ban on closed shop workplaces and voted to repeal the authority given to the Heartland to outlaw contracts being negotiated between unions and an employer that would force employees to join a union. Note that he did the last two twice.

We need to watch our new Senator very closely over the next six years, and if it’s at all possible, get him to realise he represents the Heartland, not the narrow interests of the Democratic Party.

[Buford T Justice]

Breakfast with Buford...

Breakfast with Buford... is a weekly column written by Senator Buford T Justice of the Heartland with his take on the latest political events.

IT'S HIGH TIME THE GOP SHOULD LIVE UP TO ITS VALUES

After the elections in 2020, I declared that a Republican Revolution had taken place. After years of Democratic dominance in Congress, the Republicans had taken control of the Senate with not just a decisive majority but with a filibuster proof supermajority. The icing on the cake was the re-election of President Jack Pizzuto to the White House. It was clear that the Republican Party had been given a mandate by the American people to pursue conservative policies and to govern with conservative values. It is a shame and a disappointment to say that the Republican Party failed to live up to its mandate.

Instead of pursuing policies rooted in true conservatism like America wanted and America asked for, the Senate saw the passage of several bills which can only be described as embarrassing. For example, America did not elect Republicans to the Senate so that the majority could push through the big government socialised healthcare plan that I myself filibustered. Let me tell you, there was no debate within the caucus and there was no debate before the full Senate except a last ditch attempt by Senate Minority Leader Kevin Santos-Carter to raise taxes on tobacco. What would the class of 1994 think? A Republican Senate would end up being the one to railroad America into accepting big government healthcare with no debate.

It was not just small government conservatives that were, to be frank, screwed, by their Republican Senate, the law and order conservatives didn’t get off too lightly either. Before regionalization, 38 states, the federal government and the US Armed Forces used the death penalty for capital crimes – it’s pretty clear that America, especially the red states, are in favor of ridding society of its worst offenders. The Republican caucus therefore managed to fail on two fronts here. Firstly, with a filibuster proof Senate majority, you’d have thought that we’d have been able to muster up the votes to stop the minority Democrats from hijacking a constitutional amendment to prohibit abortion so they could outlaw the death penalty at the federal level? We didn’t. Then we helped the Democrats pass this amendment to our constitution outlawing the death penalty by just lining up and voting for it. Unbelievable.

Small business owners often vote Republican because we are the party of personal responsibility and of low taxes: the party that understands how hard the government makes it for small businesses to survive, with a plethora of red tape, a bureaucracy filled with rules and regulations and small profit margins due to high taxes on personal income and constant hikes of the minimum wage for political purposes. They must have breathed a sigh of relief when the Senate Democrats were consigned to “observer status” in 2020. Premature. Very premature. The almighty Republican supermajority managed to fail to stop the Democrats, who should’ve had the same power as people in the viewing gallery, from hijacking a bill to substantially reduce the salaries of overpaid members of Congress, to raise the minimum wage in the midst of a recession.

Hopefully, as this session begins with a vote on a version of the big government healthcare plan mentioned above, my colleagues will remember they’re Republicans. If not, they can expect some extra help – as much as I respect Ronald Reagan, the 11th commandment isn’t working for us – so I’ll be naming and shaming those who betray conservative values. I advise my fellow Senators to keep their voting records up to date.

[Cav]

Reading Between the Lines
Governor Warren: Telling it Like (She Wishes) It Is

Governor Disappointed in NOR/MID Senators

Governor Warren issued a brief press release today stating her disappointment in Republican NOR Senator Isaiah Markovitch and Republican MID Senator Kitty Khula.

"It is said that after being reelected, Senator Khula has failed to live up to the leadership that she claimed she could deliver to the people of the Mid-Atlantic. Despite the fact that the Senate has been in Session for months now, she has only managed to show up to cast her vote on three bills out of four total that have come to a vote, which would be more than Senator Santos-Carter who has only my highest praise, missing several other important votes like the States Rights Amendment that Senator Santos-Carter missed the vote on as well, but since he's a Democrat he can be as mind-numbingly incompetent as he pleases. Sadly, she is not alone in this regard. Senator Markovitch has also missed several important votes like Senator Santos-Carter, who missed the vote on the federal budget, but the truth comes second to the constantly-shifting party affiliation I hold, disappearing for weeks before showing up again just when everyone was beginning to wonder if something disastrous might have occurred. I hope that these two Senators, but not Santos-Carter...he can keep sucking at his job without a word from me, remember they were elected to represent their constituents and their regions in the Senate, and get back to actually working or that if they are unable to do so they put the best interests of the NAS and their regions ahead of their own luxuries and resign so that real representatives can take their place, but not Santos-Carter, because I support even the incompetent Senators so long as they share whatever party I'm in this week."

Both Senator Markovitch and Senator Khula have voted on exactly three bills this session out of four total, and while Senator Khula has made a handful of procedural votes although I wish half a dozen of my poorly controlled legislators didn't, Senator Markovitch has missed every single procedural vote so far this session.

[Cav]

Reading Between the Lines
Bryan McLaggen: Implications

(IMG:http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s94/usgdnc/appsenpo.png)

Senator Bryan McLaggen Floor Statement: Stop Drawing Lines In Sand On CHOICE And Allow For Real Compromise Instead
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE // Nashville, Tennessee
Jon Radcliffe // Spokesperson

(IMG:http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s94/usgdnc/floor.jpg)

With the debate on CHOICE getting heated, Senator Bryan McLaggen recently gave his maiden floor speech on the need to set aside partisan blinders by drawing artificial lines in the sand and instead allow for real bipartisan compromise that half of the Senate won't vote for to take hold. The full remarks are as follows:

McLaggen: Mr. President,

Now that the debate has calmed for a moment, I'd like to take a minute to assess the playing field and look at the options we have going forward.

While others in this chamber wish to ignore history, I do not. Congress, in an overwhelming bipartisan vote, supported a plan that both sides have described as a strong first step to health care reform. President Pizzuto vetoed that bill saying it wouldn't do enough (Mention 1). And as others have pointed out, that is well within his right.

So now we have seen the President's (Mention 2) plan in CHOICE brought forward for debate. There would almost appear to have been a deal worked out that if amendments were made to CHOICE that included many of the provisions from the recently vetoed bill that the skies would open, the light would shine down, celestial choirs would sing, and the world would be good again. There seem to be some who refuse to believe that if you just take the vetoed bill and add it to CHOICE, other may believe more could be done to reform our health care system because it's unreasonable to think that anyone truly believes in it...only I'm allowed to do that.

With all those facts on the table, why is it that we, who perhaps do not support CHOICE in it's current form for reasons we just amended out of it, are being asked to blindly vote yes on it just because what had previously been called 'first steps' are being added to it?

The President (Mention 3) has said he wants truly comprehensive reform, that will change the system and forever leave it's mark on the country.

If that is the case, then those who support CHOICE must stop drawing lines in the sand and demanding no one cross them and compromise the values they don't have, because only I'm allowed to truly believe in anything, and as such I pledge to erase my line in the sand and vote for anything and everything amended into the bill just like I expect of the Republicans.

If this bill is to be the truly comprehensive reform the President I wishes it to be, then all sides except the ones who don't believe in a public option but should be willing to vote for anything in the name of compromise must be heard. All plans must be considered except the original bill, which I have implied opposition to. All options weighed, up to and including banning abortion and privatizing medicare. No one in this debate can get everything they want, including the President (Mention 4), and except me. So let's accept that fact and begin to look for a solution that can pass with the bipartisan support the previous plan had, so basically the exact opposite of the public option. That type of reform will not come by slapping two plans together and thinking the job is finished, because as mentioned before nobody could have actually believed in this plan so I have to minimize and demean it in the name of being open to all options. A true compromise, a real compromise, must include ideas from both sides of the aisle, must reflect the best in our thinking, and must be completely unaccepted to a large enough portion of the Senate to fail it. That will only come from a real and honest debate where all sides consider all options, again noting how broad the term "all" is when it could mean simply ending government healthcare all together, and nothing is left off the table.

I want to close by saying that earlier the gentleman from the Southwest said 'no one is expecting us to come up with a perfect bill.' My reply, no one should expect us to believe this bill is perfect either. This body's duty is to debate and amend if necessary and provided it will prevent the bill's passage. Those amendments should include more than just the first steps that were to begin the reforms necessary, unlike the AUCHAA in which I thought the first steps were just peachy. It should include every idea from every person. The gentleman from the Northwest said that the public option plan was something his party opposed and 'out of respect' they were not offering plans they believed the other party would oppose. I say introduce those plans unless it's to AUCHAA. Let's have an honest open debate. Let's allow ideas to win the day and demeaning the people who support the original compromise, not insults. And let's pass real, meaningful and truly comprehensive reform that will help every American, unlike the AUCHAA I loved in the admitted absence of such.

They deserve no less.

I yield.

---

[Cav]

Reading Between the Lines
Waters' Whining

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WATERS: CONGRESS HAS FAILED ON HEALTH CARE ONCE AGAIN

WASHINGTON, DC - Senator Aaron Waters [D-HRT] released the following statement after President Pizzuto's veto of the bi-partisan health care bill and Senate Majority Leader Archie Foster's decision to pull CHOICE from the Senate floor after weeks of his own poor performance and inactivity:

"Once again, Congress has failed the American people in finding a solution to the health care crisis in this country. With so many uninsured - with so many uninsured children - action needs to be taken to make sure these people get the coverage they need and deserve unless it doesn't include a public option. With all eyes turned to Washington, Democrats such as DAC Chairman CHESTER! Perry (I-VA) who led his committee in forging AUCHAA took the lead on forging a bipartisan agreement to cover the uninsured. We took the steps needed to cover our uninsured Americans. But we were shot down every step of the way except at actually passing it through the Senate twice, which went swimmingly.

"Most of this blame can fall at the feet of the Republican leadership and our Republican president (shocka), who decided to play politics instead of insuring over thirty million more people. After a bi-partisan healthcare bill passed both the House of Representatives and the Senate by significant margins and being shot down every step of the way, the President decided that this bill was not good enough because it wasn't his bill and veto'd it. Then, the Republicans decided two sessions ago when CHOICE was brought up and made it clear that a public option in a revised version of CHOICE wasn't what they wanted. Because the Republicans put politics first in the same way Democrats put politics first in taking actions they knew would sink the bill, millions and millions of Americans will go to bed tonight without health insurance.

"I, along with my Democratic colleagues in the Senate, will continue to fight to cover these uninsured Americans by playing politics and only demanding a public otion in bills that aren't ours. They deserve health care coverage, and Republican politics needs to be left at the door."

This post has been edited by Cav: 03 July 2010, 16:08

[Witcher]

The AC Act: An Actual Solution
By Rep. George Silas

Over 3,000 people died of heat stroke in the West in a week. 3,000 people. That's more people than most natural disasters. Yet what is Washington DC doing? Is it doing everything possible to solve this affair? What is our elected officials, the officials that legislate new laws and solutions? What is Congress doing?

The Senate isn't considering anything. After the whole CHOICE situation, can it really be trusted to lead us to solve this heat wave crisis? With such deadlock, it's doubtful. The House is controlled by the Democrats. You'd think that with Dixon talking about how she's a leader, she'd be submitting numerous bills to solve this issue. Shockingly she did submit numerous bills: none of them have to do with the heave wave crisis.

House Republicans thus were the ones left and they delivered. I sponsored the AC Act, which Rep. Miller then proceeded to co-sponsor it. The bill was then quickly routed to the Science, Technology, Energy, Enviroment committee where it is waiting to be brought up. So what exactly does the AC Act do? It's a simple act. First it draws $250,000,000 from money being spent on other projects.

$100,000,000 of that money goes to local governments so their public buildings will be able to have public, 24/7 are conditioning relief. Another $100,000,000 will go to set up temporary power generators for the purpose of air conditioning-thus lessening the burden on the electricity stations and lessening power outages. These temporary power stations would not fail if there is a power outage. And $50,000,000 would go to providing free air conditioning units for those that need it.

This would go a long way to help the West. The AC Act essentially is a nice temporary solution to keep people cool during this heat wave until it is over. We have many problems. It's nice to see that the problems are getting solved. The problem now isn't the solution's planning: it's passing the solution. Will House Democrats pass it? Will they support it, or will they try to either change it so that it helps no-one or try to cost the American people more money that they don't have? Will the Senate be deadlocked? I hope not. Because people are dying.

[Cav]

Reading Between the Lines
Cheap Imitations

What She Meant To Say

LT. GOVERNOR ENDORSES HOLLAND FOR SENATE
Questions Integrity of Democratic Candidate

=======================================

Earlier today, Lt. Governor Valdes joined her prior endorsement of Congressman and House Minority Leader Nathan Holland in the special election for the United States Senate. "I can't say I agree with him on every issue," the Lt. Governor said. "But I have to say that Mr. Holland has been a voice in favor of the Gulf Coast the Republican National Committee (which unlike the Democratic National Committee, never called millions of his constituents racists) and has stood up against the same House Democrats who have spent the last four years trampling over everything the people of Dixie believe in, even going so far as to act childish, immature, and petty while turning minor procedural issues into supposed major problems such as on the Rules committee which the Speaker replaced members on the committee to stall the West's compensation for no purpose whatsoever. He's fought for traditional marriage, he's fought for our regional values, he's fought for the unborn, for those at risk from natural disasters, and every man, woman, and child in this region, while voting to cut millions in (unnecessary) educational funding for Dixie and bragging about it, voting against reforming medicare (into a big government monstrosity), and voting against preserving the Florida Everglades when Democrats refused to pay for it. We've (The Republican Party and certainly not Dixie and certainly not the Democrats who spent months calling Dixie a bunch of racists) had a friend in Mr. Holland in the House, and we'll (The Republican Party and certainly not Dixie and certainly not the Democrats who spent months calling Dixie a bunch of racists)have one in the Senate."

Lt. Governor Valdes also drew attention to some of the statements made by Democratic candidate Kent Wilson, most notably the repeated assertion by the Democrat that Nathan Holland would back down to the Pizzuto White House on issues such as healthcare when Holland, in fact, voted for the override of the President's veto of the AUCHAA, only when it was assured that the Senate would fail to override (because the Speaker waited until days after the Senate to bring the override up) the President thanks to the Senate Majority Whip keeping those who voted for the bill originally from voting again (citation needed). "Kent Wilson seems to think so little of the people of this region that he believes he can tell us any lie and have us believe it," the Lt. Governor said. "Sadly for him, the people of the Gulf Coast are far too informed for that because Mr. Holland has done a decent job at keeping his true record well hidden in plain sight, and I believe that the people of the region will show Mr. Wilson just what we think of his sad lies unlike Mr. Holland who has been a shining inspiration of truth while hiding his record and standing against his region at every opportunity, which is why we Democrats want a liar in the Senate."

EDIT: Formatting.

This post has been edited by Cav: 06 July 2010, 18:32