Tag Archives: GOP

I think it is time Grover Norquist did some explaining

24 Apr

Bob Belvedere lays out some troubling facts

Michelle Malkin lays out the dots and connects them in a series of Tweets from this morning:

Hey, remember when I told young people at CPAC back in Marchto ask: “Who is Abdurahman Alamoudi?”==> twitter.com/michellemalkin…

— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) April 24, 2013

Well, Norquist’s convicted jihadist pal Abdurahman Alamoudi is also founder of the Boston bombers’ radical mosque ==> freep.com/article/201304…

— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) April 24, 2013

Boston bombers’ mosque founder/convicted jihadist Abdurahman Alamoudi=friend/funder of Grover Norquist. Flashback==>michellemalkin.com/2004/07/30/wha…

— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) April 24, 2013

#GOPproblems - Alamoudi pal Grover Norquist front & center at Gang of 8 amnesty press conference ==> twitter.com/mikescotto/sta…

— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) April 24, 2013

Lie down with Jihadists, wake up with blood on your hands, eh, Grover?

Mrs. Malkin ends by asking a very important question:

Psst. The GOP has shameful terror ties to Boston bombers’ radical mosque. Will more conservatives finally speak up?=>michellemalkin.com/2013/04/24/abd…

— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) April 24, 2013

Well Grover?

 

Bill Quick’s announcement

31 Mar

The Daily Pundit is a great blog, and Bill Quick is an asset to the Right. But, Bill has become disillusioned with the Social Conservatives. I understand his frustration, I have been rubbed the wrong way by many of them myself. His issue with them seems to be my issue with them. Too often they wish to talk of small government, until something offends them on TV, and then they turn into Statist starter kits.

Frankly, I disagree with Bill on one thing. I do not think most Conservatives are wired that way, even Social Conservatives, but, the Rick Santorum’s of the GOP are a problem. Sorry but what people do in their bedrooms is their business, no matter how disgusting you or I might find it. We are a Christian nation, with a secular government, which is how it ought to be. Too often Social Conservatives blur that distinction.

And of course some Libertarians go too far as well. What I long to see is for Libertarians and Conservatives to come together on some core principles. Small government, strong support for Constitutional rule, low taxes, low regulation, and less government in our personal lives. We cannot let an issue like Gay marriage split us apart. I can see both sides of that argument. It is to me a state by state decision, but something must be done to protect states, and churches, and businesses than recognize traditional marriage from the zealots who wish to use this issue to radically change America through lawsuits and thuggish intimidation.

Sadly, the Gay activists are not looking for equality. They are looking to use the issue to attack people of faith. For me it is like this. I do not care if you marry your Gay lover. I do care if you try to force churches and businesses into accepting your lifestyle. To me, liberty is the most important thing, nothing matters more. And yes, that includes our liberty to discriminate if we choose.

Bill says he might quit visiting certain blogs. I really hope that does not include this one.

 

Bill By Missouri GOP Representative Would Make Proposing Gun Control Legislation A Felony

20 Feb

Bill By Missouri GOP Representative Would Make Proposing Gun Control Legislation A Felony – The Examiner

Responding to a Democratic proposal giving gun owners in Missouri 90 days to turn in rifles, pistols and shotguns deemed to be “assault weapons,” state Rep. Mike Leara (R-St. Louis) introduced a measure on Monday that would make it a felony to propose legislation that further erodes the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

The bill, known as HB 633, was read for the second time on Tuesday.

“Any member of the general assembly who proposes a piece of legislation that further restricts the right of an individual to bear arms, as set forth under the second amendment of the Constitution of the United States, shall be guilty of a class D felony,” the bill says.

A Class D felony in Missouri carries a prison sentence of not more than four years.

“Leara told TheBlaze on Tuesday that he is under no illusion that the bill will pass. He says he introduced the legislation to make a point after Democrats proposed an alarming gun confiscation bill last week,” Jason Howerton wrote.

“It’s outrageous,” Leara said of the Democratic proposal. “I have received an overwhelming response of about 100 to 1 to stop this legislation.”

“I filed HB 633 as a matter of principle and as a statement in defense of the Second Amendment rights of all Missourians. I have no illusions about the bill making it through the legislative process, but I want it to be clear that the Missouri House will stand in defense of the people’s constitutional right to keep and bear arms,” he added.

The Democratic proposal, if passed into law, would give owners of “assault weapons” 90 days to either ship the weapons out of the state, render them inoperable or surrender them to authorities. Those who fail to do so could be sent to prison for a period of seven years.

Legislation mirroring the Missouri bill was proposed in Minnesota.

According to Leara, Democratic Rep. Rory Ellinger, the primary sponsor of the gun confiscation bill, calls himself a constitutional lawyer.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Asking Karl Rove to “fix” the GOP messaging is like asking Michael Moore for diet advice

15 Feb

Attention House GOP members. Karl Rove is not the solution to your problems, Karl Rove IS your problem

BUZZFEED – Republican strategist Karl Rove huddled with a group of House GOP leaders in the office Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy Thursday morning to discuss the party’s messaging efforts, Republicans familiar with the meeting said.

Details of Rove’s presentation to a group of McCarthy’s “whip team” — a subset of the broader conference tasked with educating the rank and file, rounding up votes on key bills and generally enforcing discipline within Republican ranks.

Following the meeting, several lawmakers could be heard instructing staff to setup meetings with Rove.

Rove’s trip to Capitol Hill may not be met with enthusiasm from every Republican. Rep. Steve King, one of the House’s most vocal conservative firebrands, has been eyeing a run to replace Sen. Tom Harkin now that the veteran Iowa Democrat is resigning.

King is in many ways the sort of conservative candidate that makes the party’s establishment nervous about the coming general election, and King told the Iowa Republican earlier this month his is now strongly considering a run — in part as a response to Rove.

“If I would back up in front of Karl Rove’s initiative, that would just empower him, and he would go on state after state, candidate after candidate,” King told the Republican.

Conservatives like Steve King have always made the GOP establishment nervous, Reagan made them nervous, the Tea Party makes them nervous. That is the problem, these weasels are so busy being nervous, they cannot lead, so we keep getting stuck with “safe” candidates that lose, McCain,Romney, that type of candidate. Here is a BIG HINT to the GOP leadership. Stop backing the candidates the Democrats WANT you to run! See the Democrats will signal which candidate they fear by going hard after those candidates in the primaries. The ones they do not fear they will ignore. And the candidate they want us to nominate? They will praise them and talk about what a “good presidential candidate” he or she would make, and how “formidable” they would be. By the way the media does the same thing. I have to point this out since you, Karl Rove, and his stupid white board cannot figure it out!

Tell you what. Fire Karl Rove, he is all about Karl Rove, not the GOP anyway. Call me, I work cheap, Hell I will advise you for free. Why? Because I actually care about Conservatism. Or you can keep getting advice from Rove, and his ilk. Tell me how is that working out for you?

 

Colin Powell A “Latent Democrat”? More Like A Full Blown Democrat

24 Jan

In fact I will go this far, Colin Powell has already left the GOP. he might not have officially said it, but he is a Liberal. He has all the talking points down, all the snide remarks about how secretly racist the GOP is. In fact if he is not a Democrat, he should get an Oscar for acting like one. Smitty seems to agree with me, more or less Frankly, Powell can leave and take Chris Chrsitie with him, I am sure Charlie Crist will welcome them with open arms, and lots of fake tan spray!

 

Oh goody, let’s hear another RINO bash Conservatives

13 Jan

Colin Powell makes an ass of himself in this interview with David Gregory. Sorry, it is true. Powell was a man I admired for a long time, but frankly, Powell is simply parroting the talking points of the Left these days. He says the GOP has to “change”. Change to what? A carbon copy of the Democrats?  Video is at The Daily Caller here is part of the transcript

“I think the Republican Party right now is having an identity problem,” Powell said. “And I’m still a Republican. … In recent years, there’s been a significant shift to the right, and we have seen what that shift has produced: two losing presidential campaigns. I think what the Republican Party needs to do now is take a very hard look at itself and understand that the country has changed. The country is changing demographically. And if the Republican Party does not change along with that demographic, they’re going to be in trouble.”

I would argue that we need better messengers to take the message of Conservatism to those groups  rather than trying to sell them the same identity politics the Democrats have been selling them.

The GOP showed its “dark vein of intolerance,” Powell said, in a variety of unhelpful and self-defeating ways in the most recent presidential campaign.

“You can’t go around saying we don’t want to have a solid immigration policy, [or that] we’re going to dismiss the 47 percent, [or that] we are going to make it hard for these minorities to vote, as they did in the last election,” Powell said. “What did that produce? The court struck most of that down, and most importantly, it caused people to turn out and stand in line, because these Republicans were trying to keep us from voting.”

 Where does Powell get that the GOP tried to make it harder for minorities to vote? What, showing ID is RAAAAACIST to Powell? Frankly this race baiting has to stop, especially from individuals that ARE smart enough to know better!

“There’s also a dark vein of intolerance in some parts of the party” he continued. “What I do mean by that? What I mean by that is they still sort of look down on minorities. How can I evidence that? When I see a former governor say that the president is ‘shucking and jiving,’ that’s a racial-era slave term. When I see another former governor — after the president’s first debate, where he didn’t do very well — saying that the president was lazy. … And then there’s a third word that goes along with it: birther, the whole birther movement. Why do senior Republican leaders tolerate this kind of discussion within the party?”

Good grief! Here we go any criticism of Obama is RAAAAACISM! Perhaps Mr. Powell could enlighten us as to why calling a debate performance that was, well LAZY, lazy is racist? Frankly, I think Mr. Powell’s main issue is that he is as addicted to the Identity Politics and race baiting as the next Liberal is.

Let us sum up Powell’s recipe for Republican resurgence.

1-Stop pushing for border security

2-Stop calling for lowers taxes

3- Do not expect minorities to respond well to Conservative ideals

4 Stop trying to stop voter fraud

5-Never, ever, under any circumstance dare criticize Obama

In short, it would seem that Powell wants a new Republican Party, so he can go vote republican without and still be a Liberal at heart!

 

The GOP Needs A New Speaker: Replace John Boehner With Newt Gingrich!

7 Dec

There is no requirement in the U.S. Constitution that the Speaker of the House of Representatives be a sitting member of Congress.

……………….
Our Manifestly Unserious Republican House Leader – 03/09/11

.
……………….

…………………..Click HERE to view Newt’s resume’.

——————————————————————————————————–

Related videos:

.

.

.

Sarah Palin to GOP: Stand Up Damn it!

4 Dec

Or, words to that affect. Via The Other McCain

C’mon Now, GOP, Don’t Go Wobbly on Us
by Sarah Palin on Tuesday, December 4, 2012 at 12:10pm
Please read and pass along this article. We send good conservatives to D.C. to fulfill the promises they made to the electorate, and yet when they stay true to their wordthe permanent political class in their own partypunishes them. This won’t be forgotten come 2014. Right now the GOP establishment is more concerned about the opinion of the media and the Georgetown cocktail circuit than they are “we the people” who hired them. For all this new talk of how the GOP needs a “populist movement,” it would do them good to remember they already have one; it’s called the Tea Party movement, and it won for them the majority they now enjoy in the House.

- Sarah Palin

A related Twitter hash.

Just for the sake of argument, let me posit that John Boehner is NOT a sellout, a tool, a double agent, a doddering buffoon, a sad little throne-sniffer, a spineless sycophant, a Ruling Class meat puppet, and an obsequious piece of work.

Instead, let us assert that there is some sort of method to his madness, with some plan forthcoming:

When that fullness

waxeth timely, friend,

why, then, fancy

whispering the formulation?

What the media, and you, should be focusing on after last Tuesday

13 Nov

Ever since last week’s elections, the media, in predictable fashion, has been focused on what the election mean for Republicans, and whether or not Democrats, especially the president have a mandate now. Republicans are running around shouting their theories of what went wrong and how to fix it, and Democrats are running out of footballs to spike. But, there is something else that has become obvious that this election exposed, something the media will miss, probably deliberately miss. That something else is this, the face of the Democratic Party is becoming more radicalized, seemingly by the day. Donald Douglas has a perfect example, in newly elected U.S. Rep Kyrsten Sinema

Kyrsten Sinema, you should at least know that she’s a far left-wing radical, so she’ll be right at home with the Israel-hating Democrat Caucus in the Jew-bashing Democrat Party of President Barack Obama.

See: “Kyrsten Sinema, Bisexual Israel-Hating Antiwar Radical, is Face of Today’s Democrat Party.”

And see Weasel Zippers, “Radical Anti-Israel Democrat Declared Winner In Arizona U.S. House Race…

On election night, all we heard about Sinema was that she would be the first openly bi-sexual member of Congress. The Left, of course was so excited, but, I noted that all they talked about was her sexual preferences, NOT her ideology. Now, you can chalk that up to typical democratic identity politics, but maybe they were not so willing to discuss her radical side?

Sinema has advocated against what she calls the “Israeli occupation” and helped create several groups that oppose the U.S.-Israel alliance.

“She’s trying to scrub a 10-year record of radicalism on all aspects, and she doesn’t realize you can’t erase things you’ve said and done for the sake of running for office,” said one Democratic Arizona lawmaker who has worked with Sinema. “For us [Democrats] it’s a very scary situation because we don’t want our reputation to be diminished by one ambitious politician. Many of us pro-Israel politicians don’t want to see her win because it will diminish our positions on Israel.”

Another Democratic insider in Arizona described Sinema’s past deeds as “albatrosses hanging around her neck.”

Sinema’s foray into anti-Israel activism began in the early 2000s when she organized for the Arizona Alliance for Peace and Justice (AAPJ), a group whose members have denounced Israel’s “disproportionate” use of  “violence and oppression.”

The group also decried U.S. military aid to Israel as well as the expansion of Israeli settlements “into Palestinian lands.”

Sinema later urged supporters of the AAPJ to deluge the phone lines of a radio show hosted by “an unapologetic unconditional supporter of Israeli policy.”

To this day, AAPJ continues to take a hardline stance against Israel, aligning itself with the far left Occupy AIPAC movement and sponsoring various speeches “against the Israeli occupation.”

Another of Sinema’s progeny is Local to Global Justice, a grassroots advocacy group that has positioned itself as one of Arizona’s leading critics of the Jewish state.

What is so troubling about Sinema’s views is not restricted to their radical bent. The most troubling part is that this IS what the Democratic party increasingly represents. Not too many years ago, such views would not have been tolerated by the Democratic  Party, today, they are closer to defining that same party than ever, and that radicalism is one thing we must focus on and expose. The media, could, if they chose to, easily expose candidates like Sinema. But, as we know, they are more likely to talk about whether Mitt Romney should release tax returns, or what was painted on a rock that Rick Perry might have seen, or if Herman Cain flosses between meals, or whatever asinine charges they can “investigate” about Republicans. So, it is up to us, isn’t it? Yes, it is. It is up to the bloggers, talk radio, Facebookers, Tweeters, etc to tell the stories the media will not.

We know that one problem the GOP faces is that many Americans, and not, not all of them are Liberal, have a false perception about our party. That perception is fed by Democrats, and spread by media bias. The Democratic party has become a party not of ideas, but of empty rhetoric, smear, and hyperbole. Unfortunately though, many Americans buy into that type of thing. I hear a lot of conversations every day, and you would be stunned at two things. First, how many Americans are Conservative, which is great. But, you would be stunned at how little many of us know about politics, current events, or the real stories behind latest headline in your local paper. Many of us buy into those Democrat talking points. Yes, those people are misinformed, and yes,m they are ignorant of the facts, and yes, the media is feeding that ignorance. So, what can you do? What can the GOP do?

Well, first off, the GOP has to understand something. Giving in and playing Democrats non-partisan game is never going to work. There is no appeasing the Left, we must beat them. Too many in the GOP leadership are addicted to the notion that if we “work with Democrats”, they will say nice things of us, that they will see we are not too radical, and we can heal the “partisan” divide. That of course is wrong, the Democrats believe certain things, Republicans believe certain things, those things are rarely the same, hence the divide. So, first of all, we must accept that this is a political war, and that the Democrats are dedicated to winning it, and that they will do most anything to achieve that victory.

Second, we must realize that no matter what we do, the Left will attack and demonize us, so, curbing our message will never dissuade the Left from calling us radicals, racists, sexists, greedy, mean, etc.

Third, when delivering our message, we must be CLEAR, and part of being clear demands that we not use weasel words, or try to avoid saying something that Democrats will blow out of proportion to paint us as bad people. If we are CLEAR, in our message, then we have nothing to worry about. The ideals of Conservatism did not lose last week. If anything that lack of clarity on what those ideals are cost us. Again, when we allow Democrats to paint our image, we lose. We must not fear bringing the message of Conservatism to the people. The message of Conservatism is hopeful, and optimistic, it is rooted in undeniable truths. It will never appeal to all, but, if expressed and defined, let me say again, CLEARLY, it will appeal to most of this nation.

Fourth, and finally, we must attract a broader base, everyone likely agrees there. But, how do we reach out to single women, Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, Lesbians? As best I can tell, too often Republicans try to reach out to these groups by either pandering to some degree, or we go in almost apologizing for our Conservative principles. In other words, we go in with an aura of weakness, and trepidation. Again, we must believe in our own principles, and be able to define those clearly. And we must present our case thinking that most that hear it will embrace at least a healthy portion of it. Again, we must present our position with clarity and confidence, not with weakness or vacillation.

Yes, I know, I am just some blogger, but, I will put my prescription up against anyone else’s. Why? Well, because every word I just wrote I BELIEVE IN! And the first part of the road back for the GOP has to start with believing in Conservatism!

Do you believe in polls, or people?

26 Sep

Stacy McCain, who is up to no good in Ohio, poses that question, and with darned good reason. Personally, I think all those polls are cooked, to depress GOP voter turnout, and, truth be told, Obama is headed for a fairly bad loss in November. Stacy offers up a good report from Toledo

OK, if you believe the polls, Mitt Romney’s 10 points behind in Ohio. But then there are those people — THOUSANDS of people — who stood in line in the rain to get in to see Mitt this afternoon in downtown Toledo:

Well those folks likely never got polled, which, again, begs the question

Do you believe in the polls, or do you believe in thepeople?

PEOPLE! People fed up with the worst president in America’s history. People fed up with Obama’s war on the economy, and his bumbling foreign policy, and runaway spending, and so on. And yes, people fed up with biased reporting

Jim Acosta of CNN got an exclusive one-on-one interview with Mitt Romney yesterday in order that he could ask Mitt this ridiculous question:

“African-Americans have a tremendous sense of pride that there is the first African-American president in the White House. If you were to somehow beat the first African-American president, what would you say to the black community to assure them that you would be their president also?”

Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters says Acosta “should be ashamed of himself,” but what shocks me is that, instead of punching Acosta in the face, Romney politely answered the question:

“I want to be the president of all the people of America. I want to help all the people of America. You don’t get into a race like this with myself and my family and do the kind of work and commitment that we’ve put forward without the passion to help all of America. And the people who really need the help right now are the people in the middle class, people who have fallen into poverty. I know how to get them help. The president doesn’t.”

That was a good answer, but watching Mitt punch Acosta in the face would have been fun too, and talk about blogging gold? WOW! Stacy agrees

Show of hands: How many of our readers would like to see Mitt Romney punch out a network reporter on live TV? 

Yeah — it’s unanimous. Do it, Mitt.

There ya go, Pugilists for Mitt!

Donald Douglas: Maybe Romney should pick Paul Ryan

9 Aug

 

To which I can only say MAYBE? No, definitely! I think Ryan IS the best choice, nosing out Bobby Jindal, the Governor of Louisiana. I really only have one issue with Ryan as VP, and that is I would prefer a Ryan/Romney ticket, but, that is neither here nor there. Yes, I know, the GOP “insiders” and establishment types would say Ryan is too radical as the Wall Street Journal points out

Too risky, goes the Beltway chorus. His selection would make Medicare and the House budget the issue, not the economy. The 42-year-old is too young, too wonky, too, you know, serious. Beneath it all you can hear the murmurs of the ultimate Washington insult—that Mr. Ryan is too dangerous because he thinks politics is about things that matter. That dude really believes in something, and we certainly can’t have that.

All of which highly recommend him for the job.

Very solid points, and, I must be totally honest, I think the old establishment line that goes “you have to win elections first…” is true. The problem is that the establishment too seldom follows through AFTER winning elections. Ryan is exactly the type of politician we need. A politician that actually walks the walk while he is talking the talk. That is also why I really like some other Republicans Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, Allen West, Rick Perry, Jim DeMint to name a few they are GENUINE! They are less political than principled! 

One more point here. I keep hearing that Mitt needs to pick Kelly Ayotte, or Bobby Jindal, or Marco Rubio, or maybe Condi Rice because it would send the “message”. The “message”, of course is that the GOP is diverse, big tent, open to change, and blah, blah, blah. The sad truth is if the GOP nominated two minorities for the next ten elections, and if half the GOP members of Congress were something other than White guys, the Democrats would still say the GOP was a party of bigoted old White men. Maybe the Beltway folks have not noticed that the Left lies, a lot! Maybe they have missed the rantings of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, and others?  Maybe they have missed the vilest of attack ads on Romney?

And, yes, I must admit to another reason for wanting Mitt to pick Ryan, watching Ryan debate Joe Biden? GOLD!

So, Mitt, take my advice, PICK RYAN!

 

Calling this vote stupid might be cutting the GOP too much slack

9 Jul

Bob Belvedere is amazed at how stupid the GOP can be at times. Voting with radicals? Really?

From The Hill, Pete Kasperowicz reporting, we learn [tip of the fedora to the Drudge Report]:

The House is expected to approve legislation as early as Monday that would provide grant money to states to fight bullying at schools.

The bill is backed by six Democrats, but also House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), and will be brought up Monday afternoon under a suspension of House rules. That process is usually reserved for non-controversial bills, and requires a two-thirds majority vote for passage.

Therefore, the bill stands a very good chance of passing.

Why?

This is nothing but more Federal intrusion into the business of the Several States [I thought the GOP was against that kind of thing?] and, tell me where in the damn Constitution does it say the Congress has the power over such matters [you know, that crumbling piece of paper you swore to preserve, protect, and defend]?

The House Of Representatives of The United States Of America voting on bullying?

It get’s worse:

“It is time for us to stand together and stop bullying,” said Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), the sponsor of the bill. “Everyone deserves to feel safe and free from persecution.”I urge my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of my bill in order to keep U.S. citizens safe from harassment and to work toward making America bully-free,” she added.

Why for God’s sake, GOP, are you voting for anything that corrupt, arrogant, apparatchikian-Leftist ignoramus supports?

Doesn’t the fact that she is a committed radical make you suspect that she has ulterior motives?

Are you afraid of the demonization the Democrats will engage in if you vote against the bill? Well, here’s some news for you [although you should have known this by now]: they’ll find a way to do it anyway.

What can I add? Nothing! this is what happens when you vote without remembering your principles.

Maine Republicans Bring Down Health Insurance Premiums By Deregulating Market

1 Jun

ObamaCare In Reverse: Maine Deregulates The Insurance Market; Premiums Fall – Wall Street Journal

One tragedy of the Affordable Care Act is that we already know what its regulations will do to insurance markets, because the states have been conducting policy experiments since the 1990s. But we also know from the states that the damage is reversible, as shown by Maine’s emerging insurance turnaround.

In 1993, Augusta passed coverage laws that resemble those that ObamaCare is about to impose nationwide: Insurers could only vary premiums within narrow bands regardless of age or health status, a regulation known as community rating. Four of Maine’s five insurers in the individual market stopped offering coverage and fled, and the state entered an insurance “death spiral” in which premiums don’t cover underlying medical costs. That leads to higher premiums, consumers dropping coverage as a result, and still higher premiums in turn.

Then the 2010 electoral wave carried in Republican Governor Paul LePage and a GOP legislature, and they took modest steps to deregulate the insurance market. Insurers are now allowed to sell policies for premiums that range from 3 to 1 on the basis of age, rather than the prior 1.5 to 1, and to offer incentives or discounts for consumers to choose high-value providers.

The state also created a reinsurance fund that taxes all health plans by $4 a month. If someone ends up requiring extremely expensive care, the fund picks up some of the costs, which means insurers can better manage their future liabilities and pass the savings on to individuals.

The returns are now rolling in for the new coverage that can be offered starting on July 1, and premiums are falling by as much as 69% for Maine’s dominant insurer, Anthem.

According to the Maine Bureau of Insurance, a married couple age 40 to 44 with one child will pay $1,919 a month for a policy with a $2,250 deductible in 2013 if they choose to re-up their current policy. If the same family switches to the new health plan, or buys the plan for the first time, their premium will fall to $920, a 52% decrease. A couple over 60 could buy the same policy for $1,290, down from $2,466 under the old system. Or a young adult 25 to 29 could buy a high $10,000 deductible plan for catastrophic expenses for $232, previously $665.

The old and new products are not identical, so the comparison isn’t perfect. On top of the rule changes, the benefits are slightly different, such as separate deductibles for in- and out-of-network services. And many of the year-over-year reductions are less dramatic, in the range of 10% to 20%, while a few older consumers will see rate increases.

Still, any premium decrease is remarkable on the U.S. health cost escalator, which is being accelerated by ObamaCare. Maine consumers who choose to stay with their current policy (same benefits, old rules) will see an average premium rate increase of just 1.7% from 2012 to 2013 – compared to an historical trend of about 10%. Some 46% of the existing book of business will see a rate decrease.

The major irony is that Maine’s reform merely brings its community rating rules into compliance with ObamaCare, which is actually less restrictive than the rules the state passed in 1993. The new national health law will block a further Maine liberalization that is due for 2016.

Maine learned the hard way that the most heavily regulated insurance markets are the most expensive. But the more ominous lesson out of Vacationland is for the 33 states that had the wit never to make the Maine – ObamaCare mistake. They’re the ones that are about to see premiums spike under the Affordable Care Act – perhaps by as much as 69%, and likely by far more.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

——————————————————————————————————-

Related article:

Individual Health Insurance Rates Set To Drop By Up To 60% As A Result Of Maine Health Care Reform – Maine Wire

There is encouraging news for Mainers coming out of the health care industry. Rates for individual health care plans in Maine are set to drop as much as 60% this July as a result of health reform law PL 90, also known as LD 1333, adopted in March 2011.

PL 90, the free market based health reform law, was passed last March by a Republican majority in Maine’s legislature. Governor Paul LePage signed the bill in a ceremony at the statehouse amid cries from Democrats that it wasn’t right for Maine.

“The law takes Maine in the wrong direction,” said Emily Cain, the house Democrat leader, at the time the bill was passed. But, if you’re a Mainer looking for individual health coverage, you’re probably going to be encouraged by the direction private health care costs are going – down.

“Since the law took effect this past October, we have primarily seen the laws impact to Maine’s small group insurance market with the vast majority seeing lower premiums,” said Joel Allumbaugh, President of the Maine Association of Health Underwriters and Health Care expert at the Maine Heritage Policy Center. “Now we are seeing huge progress in the individual insurance market as well, with rate decreases up to 60%, it’s a huge step forward for Maine.”

The rate filing, submitted this week by Anthem, the primary insurer offering individual plans in Maine, is not yet official. The rates would take effect in July, but first must be approved the state Insurance Superintendent. If the rates do take affect, it will be a relief for those paying for private individual insurance, or those who want to purchase a plan.

PL 90, the health reform law that Republicans guided through the legislature despite passionate opposition from Democrats, expanded the “rate bands” to allow a wider variation in cost between different aged applicants. In the past, insurance companies had to treat a 21-year-old and 55-year-old as basically the same. The new law allows for distinction in age groups.

Democrat Representative Sharon Treat was one of the strongest advocates against PL 90 during the debate about the health reform law. “Unfortunately, in the rush to pass LD 1333 [PL 90], the Republican majority is creating obstacles to better coverage and reduced costs,” she said at the time.

Now, it’s becoming evident that reducing costs to individuals is exactly what the law has done.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

*LIVE STREAMING* Alabama Republican Presidential Candidates Forum (C-SPAN / WBMA) – March 12, 2012 – 6:30pm EST

12 Mar

….LIVE STREAMING FOR THIS EVENT HAS ENDED.

….CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE ENTIRE DEBATE ON VIDEO.

.
…..

…..

.
…..Forum Live Stream – Link 1

…..Forum Live Stream – Link 2

…..Forum Live Stream – Link 3

…..Forum Live Stream – Link 4

.
…..For more information, visit the Alabama Republican Party, WBMA and C-SPAN websites.

.

Oh goodie! Debbie Whatshername is drunk on Hyperbole Punch again

11 Mar

Stacy McCain catches the DNC Chair throwing mud again

The chairwoman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee cites an “atrocious” new Virginia law requiring ultrasounds prior to abortions as an attack on “women’s rights” in a fundraising e-mail sent to Democratic donors today.

“There are still 450 other bills on birth control and abortion in state legislatures across the country,” Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Florida) wrote in the e-mail (full text below). “With a far-right faction of the GOP holding a majority in many of them, it’s unclear how many we can stop. But let me just say this: We need to be prepared to win in November. As long as women’s rights are being attacked, we’re going to keep fighting back — in Congress and in the states.”

The e-mail from Wasserman-Schultz also refers to Texas, which she says has “already eliminated two-thirds of their funding for women’s health, closing more than half of the state’s Planned Parenthood and other clinics,” saying that this “is denying hundreds of thousands of women access to basic health care.”

If lying were an Olympic sport, this woman would win gold medal on top of gold medal. She knows that Republicans are not trying to deny women access to health care. She does this to marginalize women, and, of course to keep them feeling like victims so they will keep voting Democrat. Women in America have been “victimized” by the Left, and the culture of eternal victim hood the Left has yoked women with for decades. If Debbie Whatshername had a shred of class, or decency, or if she cared one damn about women, she would cease such tactics.

Super Tuesday: The Results Are In!

7 Mar

……………………….
Well, the favorite GOP candidate of Washington DC insiders and party elites, Mitt Romney, won his home state of Taxachusetts Tuesday night, as well as the People’s Republic of Vermont. He even managed to triumph in Virginia over the hapless Ron Paul – who was his only opponent in that state – and then eeked out a razor-thin victory in Ohio due largely to the fact that he outspent runner-up Rick Santorum by a 4 to 1 margin there. He then walked away with Idaho and Alaska to round out the evening.
Total delegates won to date: 421 – Bound delegates: 339

.
……………………….
Rick Santorum took Oklahoma and then handily won Tennessee, much to the chagrin of Newt Gingrich who was counting on the south to finally lift his campaign out of third-place. He then picked up North Dakota for good measure.
Total delegates won to date: 181 – Bound delegates: 95

.
……………………….
The Newtster won his home state of Georgia by the largest delegate landslide of the evening, but could not manage to pull off another victory all night, effectively placing his troubled campaign on life-support.
Total delegates won to date: 107 – Bound delegates: 107

.
……………………….
As expected, Ron (I hope Mitt picks my son as his running mate) Paul won no states, giving rise to a whole new crop of conspiracy theories by his small but fanatical band of supporters.
Total delegates won to date: 47 – Bound delegates: 22

.

Whispers you say?

28 Feb

Is the GOP establishment ready to dump Romney if he loses Michigan and push another “vote for him because we told you so” candidate in his stead? I guess the Republican voters are not smart enough to pick our own candidate?

If Romney is a Conservative……………..

22 Feb

Then I am Napoleon. And so is Duane Lester

“I am going to lower rates across the board for all Americans by 20%. And in order to limit any impact on the deficit, because I do not want to add to the deficit, and also in order to make sure we continue to have progressivity as we’ve had in the past in our code, I’m going to limit the deductions and exemptions particularly for high income folks. And by the way, I want to make sure you understand that, for middle income families, the deductibility of home mortgage interest and charitable contributions will continue. But for high income folks, we are going to cut back on that, so we make sure the top 1% pay their fair share or more.”

The man not only used the language of the left, but he actually said he’s considering taxing the rich unfairly.

Taxes should never EVER be used to punish, or reward behaviors, or to punish those who achieve a certain level of success. Frankly, these are words i would expect from Pelosi, or Reid, or Obama. And what of SPENDING cuts? Duane wonders the same thing?

And not one word about cutting spending! Consider that. He says, “I do not want to add to the deficit,” then goes on about how he’s going to hammer the rich via the tax code rather than focusing on government spending or the size of the federal leviathan.

This is the clown, yes I said clown, that the GOP establishment has been sticking down our throats? THIS is the guy? THIS is the very best the GOP can do? Mitt “ progressivity” Romney? If that is the case, we might as well say screw it, and just accept that America is finished!!

What will Romney campaign signs read if he is nominated? Maybe “Vote Romney, he won’t redistribute wealth as much as Obama will!”

Exit question, where is Ann Coulter on this? Is she still having Romneygasms?

 

The main stream media declares war on Santorum

21 Feb

Matt notes what we all know, the media will NEVER let this election be about the economy and also offers some solid advice to Santorum.

 The administration and MSM are on a quest to avoid the economy at all costs.  To do that with Santorum, they have to hammer him on social issues, even if they have to do some cherry picking or making some stretches to do so.  Forget that gas prices are through the roof, and expected to rise even higher.  Forget that a couple million jobs are gone, and the people aren’t even bothering to look anymore.  Instead, let’s talk about how Rick Santorum is going to ban condoms, or some other nonsense. Santorum needs to do more refocusing.  Every time he is hit with a social issue question, he needs to comment quickly and go right back to economy

Go read the rest, Matt is right. Keep going back to the economy. But, I would add that this is good advice no matter who the nominee is. And, no matter who the nominee is, the DNC and the media have an attack strategy. If Romney wins, they will play the class warfare card like never before,and they will try to make Romney look like a candidate who is grossly out of touch with the common man. With Newt, well, take your pick on any number of issues, from, temperament to past “scandals”.  So, get ready folks, this one will be very nasty. There is not one trick the Left will not use to win. No matter who our nominee is, we best get ready to work our collective behinds off.

UPDATE!!

The Reaganite Republican wonders if the book on Sarah Palin is open?

No thanks- if Noot can’t come back I’d prefer and open convention, Palin vs. Jeb Bush or some such thing.

 
Mittens would lose in November due to insufficient contrast and a disgusted GOP base. I agree he’s an improvement over Obama, (not a maniacal racist/marxist) BUT I and many others deeply resent having Romney stuffed down my throat by the GOP old guard. At this point is merely slowing the growth rate of the state sector good enough? Methinks not.

Mark me down for ‘Cuda, then: We used to fear her polling negatives, and honestly I was glad she didn’t run. But now, after how all the negative campaigning has played out… Palin looks more than worth a chance since everybody else on the GOP side has suffered similar damage from flailing negative attacks.

Hmmm, I keep hearing about the brokered convention, it would make for fascinating TV and great blogging fodder, but, I would be surprised if it happens. Of course, we already know what the media attack on Palin would be. The message would be “she is stupid” repeated over and over and…… Of course, it would be fun watching Chris Matthews head explode if she actually beat Obama. Hell, MSNBS might pack up and move to Canada. Just think how that would raise the national IQ average.

 

Your must-read blog post of the day

6 Feb

From Daniel Greenfield, who writes eloquently about the two, yes, two Republican parties

There are two Republican parties. One is fairly liberal, it is hostile to the left but it also believes in stealing their thunder by adopting moderate versions of their policies

This Republican Party is strongly pro-business, but it believes that to succeed in a global economy the government must provide subsidies to businesses and individuals. It believes that immigration reform is needed, though its chosen candidates know to avoid using the word amnesty. It believes that national health care is inevitable and that the only way to avoid a government solution is through the individual mandate.

Fascinating read, the divide in our party is real, and, if it is pushed too far, well, that would lock the Democrats in as a perpetual majority party. So, there has to be some fence mending I suppose. But, I also believe firmly that many Conservatives agree with both of these GOP’s in some areas. I see faults in both, although, the Establishment Wing, if you want to label it, is certainly not as appealing to me as what I call the Conservative Wing, which Greenfield touches on as well

Then there’s the other Republican Party. This party is deeply worried about the future of the country, and not just as a place to do business. It is socially conservative, strong on national defense because it believes that we do face real threats and enemies, it is opposed to amnesty and very skeptical of Federal power.

This party is more new than it is old, it’s a party that evolved in response to the transformation of the Democratic Party at the hands of the left. It is the base from which the Republican Party draws much of its support, particularly away from the Northeast, and it is struggling to force the party to match its deeds to its words.

It does not believe that most of the national debates are a tempest in a teacup that can be settled amicably behind closed doors. It is uninterested in bipartisan great compromisers, it seeks fighters who will stand up for its agenda. It is not interested in the progressive voyage to the national future that has been taken up by both parties, what it would like is independence from their reign of policy terror. It would like to roll back the progressive policymaking of both parties.

It is concerned for its ability to earn a living, for the values of its children and the basic freedoms that it can see being lost every day. It remembers a time when people had more freedom and less rules hanging over their heads. The tide of paperwork, the omnipresent regulatory state infuriate it and lead it to vote for people who claim to want Washington off their backs. But next year there are even more regulations and paperwork to deal with.

My main disagreement, perhaps my only real disagreement with this wing is on social issues. Yes, I am pro-life, I believe there is no greater violation of basic human rights than abortion on demand. Gay marriage? I think that is a state by state decision, although I recognize that certain Gay activists will never be sated until they force every state to have laws they deem worthy. I am very much a “leave people the Hell alone” kind of Conservative. The less government the better frankly. Too many Social Conservatives hate big, intrusive government, until something on TV offends them, then, they want a big government entity, the FCC to rescue them from their offense. Sorry, but that is not “Conservative”, not in my view. Nor am I a fan of rewarding certain behaviors with tax breaks, as some Social Conservatives are. That is my main issue with Rick Santorum. One of my steadfast rules is that taxes have one legitimate purpose, to raise revenues. When the government at any level starts using taxes to reward, or punish the purchase certain products, or certain behaviors, our liberties are diminished.

That “other” GOP? The Establishment Wing? My main issue with them is their lack of ideological balls if you will. They are the party of Diminished Expectations. Take this election for example. Mitt Romney might well be the nominee, and, if that happens, well, as many issues as I have with Mitt, I still find him far preferable to Obama. But, there is a huge difference in supporting a less-than Conservative candidate as an option to a Marxist like Obama, and settling for that less-than-Conservative candidate right out of the gate. The Establishment Wing fears losing so much that they try NOT to lose, and that is a losing strategy. Even if that strategy pays off in an electoral victory, you have still lost by not sticking to principles. Or, perhaps I should say you have lost by not BELIEVING in your principles. Political cowardice is no more appealing than any other act of cowardice is it?

Those are my thoughts on the Great GOP Divide, what be yours?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,351 other followers